|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:39:05 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article om, says... On 7/20/2012 1:09 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. Don't get ahead of yourself. Lots happened between the first inquiry and the big bang. So? Fact is Zimmerman confronted Martin. And you know this how? Just because Sharpton told you so? Because the phone call proves so. Corey did not even say Zimmerman confronted Martin in her indictment. There is certainly no credible witness testimony that says it. She didn't have to. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article m,
says... On 7/20/2012 2:50 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 2:42 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? I wonder what would have happened if Martin's plan to kill Zimmerman had worked out. Would O'Bama still have said "That's my boy"? Please show cite for the statement that Martin a "plan to kill Zimmerman"? |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:50:32 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 2:42 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? That is what the law says. The law says that Martin was "beating the **** out of Zimmerman'??? What about Zimmerman's assault of Martin? |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article m,
says... On 7/20/2012 1:39 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article om, says... On 7/20/2012 1:09 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. Don't get ahead of yourself. Lots happened between the first inquiry and the big bang. So? Fact is Zimmerman confronted Martin. How so? The phone call, see above or learn to comprehend. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 07:55:33 -0400, X ` Man
wrote: On 7/20/12 7:48 AM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:07:38 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:28:12 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 09:54:51 -0400, wrote: Maybe god knew what a thug Martin was Wow, you've convicted Martin of something no one else has. Does that extra-legal right come in a cereal box? You all seem pretty quick to convict Zimmerman without that trial you demanded I think he's a scumbag but I haven't convicted him. I just hope he does time for his stupidity. He deserves it for engaging in a foolish pursuit of someone with whom he had no business nor right. You are an idiot. In your statements above you have tried and convicted Zimmerman. Amazing, isn't it, that someone who served in the military ostensibly to defend the Constitution gets up on his electronic soapbox and tells someone he is an "idiot" for merely expressing his opinion. Obviously the marines don't check recruits for basic intelligence and ability to understand. The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. The police dispatcher said "Ok, we don't need you to do that." I challenge you to provide a source for your quote. When the police say "don't do that," most people of at least average intelligence "don't do that." I suppose if you were in the military or if you are really really stupid or both, it's okay to ignore that advice. Righties...always trying to split hairs to defend their lack of understanding of issues. Taking the most liberal interpretation of the dispatcher's instruction. If she weren't being polite, it would have sounded different. I would venture a guess that this episode is a learning opportunity for all dispatchers to be more clear in their instructions and not leave room for vigilante interpretation. If you asked the dispatcher today if she'd opt for different language in her instructions to Zimmerman, I'd bet a lot of money on her answering "yes." |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On Friday, July 20, 2012 6:04:24 PM UTC-4, jps wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:17:39 -0400, wrote: >On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:07:31 -0700, jps > wrote: > >>The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do >>that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent >>actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. > >Since when is "you don't need to do" something the same as "don't do >it"? Actually, IIRC, she said "we don't need you to do that" which is a polite way of saying stand the **** down. Language has meaning. If she had a reason, or the legal ground, to say "Do not follow him", she would have been trained to do just that. After all, supposedly the dispatchers and police departments knew him very well, right? You're trying too hard to turn it into something it's not. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article > , says... > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > > >In article > , > says... > >> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >> > >> >In article > , > >> says... > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >> >> >self-defense. > >> >> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >> > > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >> could point him out when they got there. > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > > > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >killing Martin. > > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape you or whatever? > > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > concrete. Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same thing. It's called protecting yourself. So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Friday, July 20, 2012 6:04:24 PM UTC-4, jps wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:17:39 -0400, wrote: >On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:07:31 -0700, jps > wrote: > >>The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do >>that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent >>actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. > >Since when is "you don't need to do" something the same as "don't do >it"? Actually, IIRC, she said "we don't need you to do that" which is a polite way of saying stand the **** down. Language has meaning. If she had a reason, or the legal ground, to say "Do not follow him", she would have been trained to do just that. After all, supposedly the dispatchers and police departments knew him very well, right? You're trying too hard to turn it into something it's not. Bull****, she was a dispatcher not a lawyer or a police officer. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article > , says... > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > > >In article > , > says... > >> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >> > >> >In article > , > >> says... > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >> >> >self-defense. > >> >> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >> > > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >> could point him out when they got there. > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > > > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >killing Martin. > > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape you or whatever? > > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > concrete. Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same thing. It's called protecting yourself. So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. There is no evidence that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Friday, July 20, 2012 6:04:24 PM UTC-4, jps wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:17:39 -0400, wrote: >On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:07:31 -0700, jps > wrote: > >>The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do >>that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent >>actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. > >Since when is "you don't need to do" something the same as "don't do >it"? Actually, IIRC, she said "we don't need you to do that" which is a polite way of saying stand the **** down. Language has meaning. If she had a reason, or the legal ground, to say "Do not follow him", she would have been trained to do just that. After all, supposedly the dispatchers and police departments knew him very well, right? You're trying too hard to turn it into something it's not. Bull****, she was a dispatcher not a lawyer or a police officer. Bingo! |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article m,
says... On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article > , says... > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > > >In article > , > says... > >> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >> > >> >In article > , > >> says... > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >> >> >self-defense. > >> >> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >> > > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >> could point him out when they got there. > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > > > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >killing Martin. > > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape you or whatever? > > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > concrete. Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same thing. It's called protecting yourself. So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. Yes it was. There is no evidence that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? I'd tell him it's none of his ****ing business. BUT the fact is, as the girlfriend stated, Zimmerman pushed Martin hard enough that his phone headset fell. Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? He didn't keep an eye on him "from a distance" he went up to Martin and started messing with him, it's very clear from the phone call. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/2012 10:42 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article m, says... On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article > , says... > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > > >In article > , > says... > >> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >> > >> >In article > , > >> says... > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >> >> >self-defense. > >> >> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >> > > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >> could point him out when they got there. > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > > > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >killing Martin. > > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape you or whatever? > > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > concrete. Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same thing. It's called protecting yourself. So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. Yes it was. There is no evidence that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? I'd tell him it's none of his ****ing business. BUT the fact is, as the girlfriend stated, Zimmerman pushed Martin hard enough that his phone headset fell. Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? He didn't keep an eye on him "from a distance" he went up to Martin and started messing with him, it's very clear from the phone call. Try to follow the chronology of events. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article m,
says... On 7/21/2012 10:42 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article m, says... On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article > , says... > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > > >In article > , > says... > >> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >> > >> >In article > , > >> says... > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >> >> >self-defense. > >> >> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >> > > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >> could point him out when they got there. > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > > > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >killing Martin. > > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape you or whatever? > > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > concrete. Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same thing. It's called protecting yourself. So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. Yes it was. There is no evidence that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? I'd tell him it's none of his ****ing business. BUT the fact is, as the girlfriend stated, Zimmerman pushed Martin hard enough that his phone headset fell. Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? He didn't keep an eye on him "from a distance" he went up to Martin and started messing with him, it's very clear from the phone call. Try to follow the chronology of events. You are delusional. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On Saturday, July 21, 2012 10:42:20 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:
In article .com>, says... > > On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote: > > In article >, > > says... > >> > >> On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: > >>> In article >, > >>> says... > >>> > > >>> > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > >In article >, > >>> > says... > >>> > >> > >>> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >>> > >> > >>> > >> >In article >, > >>> > >> says... > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >>> > >> >> wrote: > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >>> > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >>> > >> >> >self-defense. > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >>> > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >>> > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >>> > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >>> > >> > >>> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >>> > >> could point him out when they got there. > >>> > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > >>> > > > >>> > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >>> > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >>> > >killing Martin. > >>> > > >>> > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > >>> > > >>> > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. > >>> > >>> Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night > >>> comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand > >>> there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape > >>> you or whatever? > >>> > > >>> > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > >>> > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > >>> > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > >>> > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > >>> > concrete. > >>> > >>> Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same > >>> thing. It's called protecting yourself. > >> > >> So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. > > > > Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone > > approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, > > I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. > > > > The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. Yes it was. > There is no evidence > that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he > was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to > that action? I'd tell him it's none of his ****ing business. BUT the fact is, as the girlfriend stated, Zimmerman pushed Martin hard enough that his phone headset fell. > Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving > parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid > out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman > decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police > arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" > It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is > where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? He didn't keep an eye on him "from a distance" he went up to Martin and started messing with him, it's very clear from the phone call. What's very clear is that Martin attacked Zimmerman for asking him a question. Martin initiated the violence. So if you asked someone a question and they started pounding your head into the pavement, you'd just let them, huh? |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On Saturday, July 21, 2012 8:40:40 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:
In article >, says... > > On Friday, July 20, 2012 6:04:24 PM UTC-4, jps wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:17:39 -0400, wrote: > > > > >On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:07:31 -0700, jps > wrote: > > > > > >>The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do > > >>that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent > > >>actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. > > > > > >Since when is "you don't need to do" something the same as "don't do > > >it"? > > > > Actually, IIRC, she said "we don't need you to do that" which is a > > polite way of saying stand the **** down. > > Language has meaning. If she had a reason, or the legal ground, to say "Do not follow him", she would have been trained to do just that. After all, supposedly the dispatchers and police departments knew him very well, right? > > You're trying too hard to turn it into something it's not. Bull****, she was a dispatcher not a lawyer or a police officer. And there you go, now we agree that Zimmerman had no instruction not to follow Martin from anyone who has any authority. And BTW, police dispatchers are highly trained. More so than you. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Saturday, July 21, 2012 10:42:20 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article .com>, says... > > On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote: > > In article >, > > says... > >> > >> On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: > >>> In article >, > >>> says... > >>> > > >>> > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > >In article >, > >>> > says... > >>> > >> > >>> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >>> > >> > >>> > >> >In article >, > >>> > >> says... > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >>> > >> >> wrote: > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >>> > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >>> > >> >> >self-defense. > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >>> > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >>> > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >>> > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >>> > >> > >>> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >>> > >> could point him out when they got there. > >>> > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > >>> > > > >>> > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >>> > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >>> > >killing Martin. > >>> > > >>> > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > >>> > > >>> > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. > >>> > >>> Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night > >>> comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand > >>> there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape > >>> you or whatever? > >>> > > >>> > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > >>> > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > >>> > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > >>> > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > >>> > concrete. > >>> > >>> Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same > >>> thing. It's called protecting yourself. > >> > >> So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. > > > > Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone > > approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, > > I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. > > > > The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. Yes it was. > There is no evidence > that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he > was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to > that action? I'd tell him it's none of his ****ing business. BUT the fact is, as the girlfriend stated, Zimmerman pushed Martin hard enough that his phone headset fell. > Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving > parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid > out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman > decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police > arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" > It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is > where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? He didn't keep an eye on him "from a distance" he went up to Martin and started messing with him, it's very clear from the phone call. What's very clear is that Martin attacked Zimmerman for asking him a question. Martin initiated the violence. So if you asked someone a question and they started pounding your head into the pavement, you'd just let them, huh? Please show the evidence that it's very clear that Martin attacked Zimmerman first. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Saturday, July 21, 2012 8:40:40 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article >, says... > > On Friday, July 20, 2012 6:04:24 PM UTC-4, jps wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:17:39 -0400, wrote: > > > > >On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:07:31 -0700, jps > wrote: > > > > > >>The police dispatcher told him specifically that he "didn't need to do > > >>that" when she realized he was running after Trayvon. His negligent > > >>actions ended up with the death of a 17 year old kid. > > > > > >Since when is "you don't need to do" something the same as "don't do > > >it"? > > > > Actually, IIRC, she said "we don't need you to do that" which is a > > polite way of saying stand the **** down. > > Language has meaning. If she had a reason, or the legal ground, to say "Do not follow him", she would have been trained to do just that. After all, supposedly the dispatchers and police departments knew him very well, right? > > You're trying too hard to turn it into something it's not. Bull****, she was a dispatcher not a lawyer or a police officer. And there you go, now we agree that Zimmerman had no instruction not to follow Martin from anyone who has any authority. No, we don't. Where did I ever say she didn't have any authority? And BTW, police dispatchers are highly trained. More so than you. Oh, really? What is there undergrad and grad degrees in? |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/12 4:07 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:51:53 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 3:47 PM, wrote: . Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? That is what the law says. I'm betting Zimmerman cops a plea. If he does, O'Mara is not earning his money. This is a very weak case brought for purely political reasons. All he needs to do is stand on the law and he walks. That is why they are stalling. Once the elections are over and the news cycle moves on to more pressing things (like the punk in Colorado) this thing will just go away. I still doubt it even survives the immunity hearing. No one is stalling. At Zimmerman's first bail hearing, the defense waived the right to a speedy trial because he wouldn't be spending his time on his butt in a cell. Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar. The immunity hearing will be interesting. When is it? Floridians should be ashamed of themselves for allowing a law that permits a hothead like Zimmerman to pick a fight, shoot and kill the guy he attacked, and then being able to "stand his ground." It's far too easy a law to abuse. But, then, it's Florida, and you boys don't mind electing a felon as your governor. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/12 4:44 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 15:21:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... What's very clear is that Martin attacked Zimmerman for asking him a question. Martin initiated the violence. So if you asked someone a question and they started pounding your head into the pavement, you'd just let them, huh? Please show the evidence that it's very clear that Martin attacked Zimmerman first. Show any evidence to the contrary. It is the prosecution that has to prove their case. Zimmerman has a presumption of innocence. Without absolute proof from the state that Zimmerman's story is not true, we are left with Zimmerman's story. That is why Angie is trying to make the case that he got out of his truck with the intent of shooting Martin and nothing else that happened was important. It is all she has. That is going to be a tough case to make and I doubt Scott really expected a win, his knee was just jerking like everyone elses to "do something" Zimmerman has no credibility. The act of shooting an *unarmed man* on the street, as opposed to a burglar breaking into your house, should be enough for at least a manslaughter conviction. Martin was under no obligation to respond to Zimmerman's demands. Under similar circumstances, I would have told Zimmerman to **** off. Were Zimmerman, however, in the uniform of a sworn policeman, I would have responded in a polite manner. You live in a crazy state. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/2012 3:21 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Saturday, July 21, 2012 10:42:20 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article .com>, says... > > On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote: > > In article >, > > says... > >> > >> On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: > >>> In article >, > >>> says... > >>> > > >>> > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > >In article >, > >>> > says... > >>> > >> > >>> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >>> > >> > >>> > >> >In article >, > >>> > >> says... > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >>> > >> >> wrote: > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >>> > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >>> > >> >> >self-defense. > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >>> > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >>> > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >>> > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >>> > >> > >>> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >>> > >> could point him out when they got there. > >>> > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > >>> > > > >>> > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >>> > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >>> > >killing Martin. > >>> > > >>> > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > >>> > > >>> > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. > >>> > >>> Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night > >>> comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand > >>> there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape > >>> you or whatever? > >>> > > >>> > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > >>> > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > >>> > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > >>> > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > >>> > concrete. > >>> > >>> Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same > >>> thing. It's called protecting yourself. > >> > >> So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. > > > > Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone > > approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, > > I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. > > > > The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. Yes it was. > There is no evidence > that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he > was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to > that action? I'd tell him it's none of his ****ing business. BUT the fact is, as the girlfriend stated, Zimmerman pushed Martin hard enough that his phone headset fell. > Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving > parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid > out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman > decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police > arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" > It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is > where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? He didn't keep an eye on him "from a distance" he went up to Martin and started messing with him, it's very clear from the phone call. What's very clear is that Martin attacked Zimmerman for asking him a question. Martin initiated the violence. So if you asked someone a question and they started pounding your head into the pavement, you'd just let them, huh? Please show the evidence that it's very clear that Martin attacked Zimmerman first. Taint no evedence that Zimmerman accosted or attacked the kid atol. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/2012 4:25 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 10:42:20 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article m, says... On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article > , says... > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > > >In article > , > says... > >> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >> > >> >In article > , > >> says... > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >> >> >self-defense. > >> >> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >> > > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >> could point him out when they got there. > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > > > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >killing Martin. > > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape you or whatever? > > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > concrete. Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same thing. It's called protecting yourself. So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. Yes it was. There is no evidence that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? I'd tell him it's none of his ****ing business. BUT the fact is, as the girlfriend stated, Zimmerman pushed Martin hard enough that his phone headset fell. You know that how? The girlfriend never said that. She just said the call dropped. It could have just as likely have been that when Martin punched Zimmerman in the nose that he dropped his phone. Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? He didn't keep an eye on him "from a distance" he went up to Martin and started messing with him, it's very clear from the phone call. You made that up. Otherwise cite it., It's all Zimmermans fault. He smashed the kids hand with his face. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/2012 4:13 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:13:30 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:50:32 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 2:42 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? That is what the law says. The law says that Martin was "beating the **** out of Zimmerman'??? What about Zimmerman's assault of Martin? What assault? Nobody ever saw Zimmerman assault martin and martin showed no signs of an assault. He had bloody fists from hitting Zimmerman but no signs he was ever hit. That beast Zimmerman asked him a question he didn't want to answer... |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:51:53 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 3:47 PM, wrote: . Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? That is what the law says. I'm betting Zimmerman cops a plea. If he does, O'Mara is not earning his money. This is a very weak case brought for purely political reasons. All he needs to do is stand on the law and he walks. That is why they are stalling. Once the elections are over and the news cycle moves on to more pressing things (like the punk in Colorado) this thing will just go away. I still doubt it even survives the immunity hearing. Just what "political reasons"? |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:13:30 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:50:32 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 2:42 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? That is what the law says. The law says that Martin was "beating the **** out of Zimmerman'??? What about Zimmerman's assault of Martin? What assault? Nobody ever saw Zimmerman assault martin and martin showed no signs of an assault. He had bloody fists from hitting Zimmerman but no signs he was ever hit. And no one saw Martin initiate an assault on Zimmerman. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article , says...
On 7/21/2012 4:13 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:13:30 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:50:32 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 2:42 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man wrote: When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim self-defense. That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all Corey is alleging he did in the indictment Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone conversation Martin was having. He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he could point him out when they got there. Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin. What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? That is what the law says. The law says that Martin was "beating the **** out of Zimmerman'??? What about Zimmerman's assault of Martin? What assault? Nobody ever saw Zimmerman assault martin and martin showed no signs of an assault. He had bloody fists from hitting Zimmerman but no signs he was ever hit. That beast Zimmerman asked him a question he didn't want to answer... Insanity. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 16:19:20 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/21/12 4:07 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:51:53 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 3:47 PM, wrote: . Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? That is what the law says. I'm betting Zimmerman cops a plea. If he does, O'Mara is not earning his money. This is a very weak case brought for purely political reasons. All he needs to do is stand on the law and he walks. That is why they are stalling. Once the elections are over and the news cycle moves on to more pressing things (like the punk in Colorado) this thing will just go away. I still doubt it even survives the immunity hearing. No one is stalling. At Zimmerman's first bail hearing, the defense waived the right to a speedy trial because he wouldn't be spending his time on his butt in a cell. Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar. The immunity hearing will be interesting. When is it? Again Z is out on bail, that he paid handsomely for. He is in no hurry. Once the media frenzy dies down and he can get a fair trial, he will go for one. I suspect that. by now, O'Mara's detectives have quite a dossier about the "angel" Travonn Martin. I wonder how many unsolved burglaries got thrown in his coffin by the N. Miami police before they buried him. We still have not even heard about the disposition of the presumed stolen jewelry Travonn had at school. His family never said it was theirs. The police are under a gag order right now and at least one cop was disciplined for a leak. Floridians should be ashamed of themselves for allowing a law that permits a hothead like Zimmerman to pick a fight, shoot and kill the guy he attacked, and then being able to "stand his ground." It's far too easy a law to abuse. You and "Ineverboat" seem to be assuming Zimmerman picked the fight with absolutely no evidence so far that it is true. When you start with a scenario that is not true, it is easy to jump to the wrong conclusion. Then why did Zimmerman get out of his car? By the way, he's given two different answers to that already. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 10:42:20 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article m, says... On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article > , says... > > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > > >In article > , > says... > >> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >> > >> >In article > , > >> says... > >> >> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >> >> >self-defense. > >> >> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >> > > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >> could point him out when they got there. > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > > > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >killing Martin. > > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape you or whatever? > > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > concrete. Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same thing. It's called protecting yourself. So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. Yes it was. There is no evidence that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? I'd tell him it's none of his ****ing business. BUT the fact is, as the girlfriend stated, Zimmerman pushed Martin hard enough that his phone headset fell. You know that how? The girlfriend never said that. She just said the call dropped. It could have just as likely have been that when Martin punched Zimmerman in the nose that he dropped his phone. Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? He didn't keep an eye on him "from a distance" he went up to Martin and started messing with him, it's very clear from the phone call. You made that up. Otherwise cite it., Okay. http://vveasey.hubpages.com/hub/Why-...ot-And-Killed- By-George-Zimmerman |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
|
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article ,
says... On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 16:56:38 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/21/12 4:44 PM, wrote: On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 15:21:23 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... What's very clear is that Martin attacked Zimmerman for asking him a question. Martin initiated the violence. So if you asked someone a question and they started pounding your head into the pavement, you'd just let them, huh? Please show the evidence that it's very clear that Martin attacked Zimmerman first. Show any evidence to the contrary. It is the prosecution that has to prove their case. Zimmerman has a presumption of innocence. Without absolute proof from the state that Zimmerman's story is not true, we are left with Zimmerman's story. That is why Angie is trying to make the case that he got out of his truck with the intent of shooting Martin and nothing else that happened was important. It is all she has. That is going to be a tough case to make and I doubt Scott really expected a win, his knee was just jerking like everyone elses to "do something" Zimmerman has no credibility. The act of shooting an *unarmed man* on the street, as opposed to a burglar breaking into your house, should be enough for at least a manslaughter conviction. Martin was under no obligation to respond to Zimmerman's demands. Under similar circumstances, I would have told Zimmerman to **** off. Were Zimmerman, however, in the uniform of a sworn policeman, I would have responded in a polite manner. You live in a crazy state. You still assume Martin did not approach Zimmerman and punch him in the nose in answer to "what are you doing here"? Would you do that? You would automatically open up with fighting words when you were a visitor on private property? Yes, when some stranger was approaching me in the dark. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
In article om,
says... On 7/21/2012 3:21 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On Saturday, July 21, 2012 10:42:20 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: In article .com>, says... > > On 7/21/2012 8:40 AM, iBoaterer wrote: > > In article >, > > says... > >> > >> On Friday, July 20, 2012 4:10:59 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote: > >>> In article >, > >>> says... > >>> > > >>> > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:09:32 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > >In article >, > >>> > says... > >>> > >> > >>> > >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:29:14 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote: > >>> > >> > >>> > >> >In article >, > >>> > >> says... > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:50:01 -0400, X ` Man > > >>> > >> >> wrote: > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> When you initiate a confrontation, as Zimmerman > >>> > >> >> >did, you shouldn't be allowed to end it with a firearm and then claim > >>> > >> >> >self-defense. > >>> > >> >> > >>> > >> >> That all assumes they can prove Zimmerman initiated it. Simply getting > >>> > >> >> out of your car is not initiating a confrontation and that is all > >>> > >> >> Corey is alleging he did in the indictment > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> >Well the, why did he get out of the car? AND you're forgetting the phone > >>> > >> >conversation Martin was having. > >>> > >> > >>> > >> He got out of the car to WATCH the person he called the cops on so he > >>> > >> could point him out when they got there. > >>> > >> Is getting out of your car a crime now? Corey seems to think so. > >>> > > > >>> > >Bull****, he confronted Martin. His girlfriend heard it. Is looking at a > >>> > >car a crime now? That's why you seem to think Zimmerman was justified in > >>> > >killing Martin. > >>> > > >>> > What was the first thing the girlfriend said she heard between them? > >>> > > >>> > Hint, it was Martin addressing Zimmerman. > >>> > >>> Yes, asking Zimmerman what he wanted. If a strange man in the night > >>> comes up to you, are you going to ask him his intentions or just stand > >>> there and wait to see if he's going to rob you, hurt you, kill you, rape > >>> you or whatever? > >>> > > >>> > Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am > >>> > not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a > >>> > forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot > >>> > Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the > >>> > concrete. > >>> > >>> Again, if a man attacked me in the middle of the night, I'd do the same > >>> thing. It's called protecting yourself. > >> > >> So you'd pull a Zimmerman on someone that attacked you. It's good to know you've come around. > > > > Come around? I've said that from the very beginning that if someone > > approached me in the middle of the night like Zimmerman did to Martin, > > I'd have defended myself just like Martin presumably did. > > > > The thing is, it wasn't in the middle of the night. Yes it was. > There is no evidence > that Zimmerman did nothing more than ask the kid who he was and what he > was doing on the property. What would be your reasonable "defense" to > that action? I'd tell him it's none of his ****ing business. BUT the fact is, as the girlfriend stated, Zimmerman pushed Martin hard enough that his phone headset fell. > Apparently the kid's response and his suspicious activity involving > parked cars led Zimmerman to ask the police to come and check the kid > out. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action? Zimmerman > decided to keep an ey on the kid from a distance till the police > arrived. What would be your reasonable "defense" to that action" > It seems that, at this point, a game of hide and seek started. Here is > where it starts to get really interesting. Do you want to finish the story? He didn't keep an eye on him "from a distance" he went up to Martin and started messing with him, it's very clear from the phone call. What's very clear is that Martin attacked Zimmerman for asking him a question. Martin initiated the violence. So if you asked someone a question and they started pounding your head into the pavement, you'd just let them, huh? Please show the evidence that it's very clear that Martin attacked Zimmerman first. Taint no evedence that Zimmerman accosted or attacked the kid atol. Sure there is, Martin's dead body. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/12 10:35 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 16:19:20 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/21/12 4:07 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:51:53 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 3:47 PM, wrote: . Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? That is what the law says. I'm betting Zimmerman cops a plea. If he does, O'Mara is not earning his money. This is a very weak case brought for purely political reasons. All he needs to do is stand on the law and he walks. That is why they are stalling. Once the elections are over and the news cycle moves on to more pressing things (like the punk in Colorado) this thing will just go away. I still doubt it even survives the immunity hearing. No one is stalling. At Zimmerman's first bail hearing, the defense waived the right to a speedy trial because he wouldn't be spending his time on his butt in a cell. Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar. The immunity hearing will be interesting. When is it? Again Z is out on bail, that he paid handsomely for. He is in no hurry. Once the media frenzy dies down and he can get a fair trial, he will go for one. I suspect that. by now, O'Mara's detectives have quite a dossier about the "angel" Travonn Martin. I wonder how many unsolved burglaries got thrown in his coffin by the N. Miami police before they buried him. We still have not even heard about the disposition of the presumed stolen jewelry Travonn had at school. His family never said it was theirs. The police are under a gag order right now and at least one cop was disciplined for a leak. Floridians should be ashamed of themselves for allowing a law that permits a hothead like Zimmerman to pick a fight, shoot and kill the guy he attacked, and then being able to "stand his ground." It's far too easy a law to abuse. You and "Ineverboat" seem to be assuming Zimmerman picked the fight with absolutely no evidence so far that it is true. When you start with a scenario that is not true, it is easy to jump to the wrong conclusion. Zimmerman is a known hothead with a reputation for exploding and now, a known liar. There's no reason to give credence to anything he says or claims. |
Obviously, credibility is not an issue...
On 7/21/2012 10:35 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 16:19:20 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/21/12 4:07 PM, wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:51:53 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 7/20/12 3:47 PM, wrote: . Martin was shot because he was beating the **** out of Zimmerman. I am not sure what the law is where you live but aggravated battery is a forcible felony in Florida and a bystander could have legally shot Martin if they came up on him beating Zimmerman's head on the concrete. Is that what Rush told you to say? That is what the law says. I'm betting Zimmerman cops a plea. If he does, O'Mara is not earning his money. This is a very weak case brought for purely political reasons. All he needs to do is stand on the law and he walks. That is why they are stalling. Once the elections are over and the news cycle moves on to more pressing things (like the punk in Colorado) this thing will just go away. I still doubt it even survives the immunity hearing. No one is stalling. At Zimmerman's first bail hearing, the defense waived the right to a speedy trial because he wouldn't be spending his time on his butt in a cell. Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar. The immunity hearing will be interesting. When is it? Again Z is out on bail, that he paid handsomely for. He is in no hurry. Once the media frenzy dies down and he can get a fair trial, he will go for one. I suspect that. by now, O'Mara's detectives have quite a dossier about the "angel" Travonn Martin. I wonder how many unsolved burglaries got thrown in his coffin by the N. Miami police before they buried him. We still have not even heard about the disposition of the presumed stolen jewelry Travonn had at school. His family never said it was theirs. The police are under a gag order right now and at least one cop was disciplined for a leak. Floridians should be ashamed of themselves for allowing a law that permits a hothead like Zimmerman to pick a fight, shoot and kill the guy he attacked, and then being able to "stand his ground." It's far too easy a law to abuse. You and "Ineverboat" seem to be assuming Zimmerman picked the fight with absolutely no evidence so far that it is true. When you start with a scenario that is not true, it is easy to jump to the wrong conclusion. Maybe after all the investigating is done Martin will get a long jail sentence posthumously. Zimmerman might even be a hero. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:38 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com