In article , says...

In article om, hank57
@socialworker.net says...

On 5/7/2013 1:35 PM, wrote:
On Tuesday, May 7, 2013 10:24:35 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:


His uncle doesn't have property in that sub division.

Wasn't it his fathers girlfriend who actually onwed the property. Trayvon's daddy was

shacking up with some chick.

I suppose THAT makes Martin guilty?

Just another piece of information.

Relevant how?

In that he was in a neighborhood where he was not known. He was a stranger in the area, reportedly acting in a suspicious way. That's how.


Was it profiling or common sense that drew Zimms attention to the young
fella peering into car windows.

Common bigotry. It's the right wing way!

Zimmerman is a registered Democrat.

In article , says...

In article ,
says...

In article , says...

On Tuesday, May 7, 2013 10:24:35 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:


His uncle doesn't have property in that sub division.

Wasn't it his fathers girlfriend who actually onwed the property. Trayvon's daddy was

shacking up with some chick.

I suppose THAT makes Martin guilty?

Just another piece of information.

Relevant how?

In that he was in a neighborhood where he was not known. He was a stranger in the area, reportedly acting in a suspicious way. That's how.

Bingo! I know who the little ******* hoodlums in my neighborhood are.

So you're going to kill them? And what about a stranger in your
neighborhood, how would you know that HE was a "hoodlum"? An awful lot
has been said right here in rec.boats that the kid had a "past". How did
Zimmerman know about his past, unless Zimmerman knew who he was?

No, I never said that. I said I know who the little ******* hoodlums are in my neighborhood.
If I see little ******* hoodlums in my neighborhood that I don't know I would follow them and
make sure that they aren't stealing from me or my neighbors.

On Tue, 7 May 2013 14:49:31 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

How did
Zimmerman know about his past, unless Zimmerman knew who he was?

====

He didn't need to know. Anyone walking aimlessly through a
neighborhood and looking into cars is immediately suspect. That is
usually criminal behavior and it's easy to spot.

On 5/7/13 6:24 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Tue, 7 May 2013 14:49:31 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

How did
Zimmerman know about his past, unless Zimmerman knew who he was?

====

He didn't need to know. Anyone walking aimlessly through a
neighborhood and looking into cars is immediately suspect. That is
usually criminal behavior and it's easy to spot.


There's no evidence the young man was doing anything other than talking
on a cell phone and carrying a soft drink and a bag of candy. Zimmerman,
on the other hand, has a recorded history of violence.

On Tue, 7 May 2013 14:50:04 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

Was it profiling or common sense that drew Zimms attention to the young
fella peering into car windows.

Common bigotry. It's the right wing way!

====

I disagree with that. I have called the cops on white kids who were
acting in exactly the same way. Suspicious behavior is what it is
and totally color blind.

On 5/7/2013 6:28 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 5/7/13 6:24 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Tue, 7 May 2013 14:49:31 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

How did
Zimmerman know about his past, unless Zimmerman knew who he was?

====

He didn't need to know. Anyone walking aimlessly through a
neighborhood and looking into cars is immediately suspect. That is
usually criminal behavior and it's easy to spot.


There's no evidence the young man was doing anything other than talking
on a cell phone and carrying a soft drink and a bag of candy. Zimmerman,
on the other hand, has a recorded history of violence.

And so the kid's "history of violence" is hidden by the law, seems it
couldn't hide from lady justice...

On 5/7/2013 5:06 PM, BAR wrote:
In article , says...

In article ,
says...

On Tuesday, May 7, 2013 10:24:35 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:


His uncle doesn't have property in that sub division.

Wasn't it his fathers girlfriend who actually onwed the property. Trayvon's daddy was

shacking up with some chick.

I suppose THAT makes Martin guilty?

Just another piece of information.

Relevant how?

In that he was in a neighborhood where he was not known. He was a stranger in the area, reportedly acting in a suspicious way. That's how.

So he should die, eh?

He died as a result of an altercation with an armed citizen. Martin thought he was going to
beat down some guy and he ended up dying for his efforts.



Yup...

On Tuesday, May 7, 2013 2:15:18 PM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,

says...



On Tuesday, May 7, 2013 10:24:35 AM UTC-4, iBoaterer wrote:





His uncle doesn't have property in that sub division.



Wasn't it his fathers girlfriend who actually onwed the property. Trayvon's daddy was



shacking up with some chick.



I suppose THAT makes Martin guilty?



Just another piece of information.



Relevant how?



In that he was in a neighborhood where he was not known. He was a stranger in the area, reportedly acting in a suspicious way. That's how.



So he should die, eh?

Nah, and I never said that. You know that. I just showed you how the aforementioned info (that you questioned) was relevant. There is no doubt it will be explored in court.

He died because when he confronted Zimmerman, he attacked him instead of saying "I'm headed down to Miss XX's house, where my dad is shacking up with her, and I'm visiting". That was an unfortunate choice, and ended up costing him his life.

Meeting a question with force isn't always the best answer.

On May 8, 12:45*am, wrote:

At this point we should just let the court decide this.

That's what I've been saying all along.

On 5/8/13 7:45 AM, Tim wrote:
On May 8, 12:45 am, wrote:

At this point we should just let the court decide this.

That's what I've been saying all along.



Might be a more fair trial if it were held in a state not so gun crazy.