• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

George Zimmerman

PhDeac said:
It's amazing how many people are uncritically lapping up the story of a killer.

There's a decent chance Martin gets arrested for something if the cops come. It's a huge risk for a black teen to just wait for police to come even if he was doing nothing wrong. He's more sympathetic dead than alive and several of you assume he was up to something because Zimmerman chased him.
Click to expand...

Your argument makes no sense. It's somehow less of a risk for that teen to put a beat-down on the guy that called the cops (while the cops are en-route) than to just have gone home in the time he could? I thought TM was an "innocent 12 year old with some skittles"...what kind of risk would he be taking by waiting around for the cops?

It's pretty simple that in our society you can't physically throw beatings on folks. Yet there is a constant desire to excuse that inconvenient part of this story for political reasons.
 
bobknightfan said:
As I told you previously in a negrep, you're nuts. And with 6 posts in more than two years, you're also obviously an additional parody of someone already posting on this board. Why don't you show your real face? Are you ashamed of the positions you are taking?
Click to expand...

Maybe he deleted a bunch of his own posts.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
It hasn't been talked about much because people don't want to admit that this is a textbook case of concealed carry. People fail to realize that people who go through the trouble of getting a CHL are the ones who are most reluctant to use them. It has been about 15 years now (or more) since people thought the first CHL laws would lead to anarchy. They didn't People acted responsibly. The biggest case they have now is against GZ, and they have no evidence that he acted wrongly. None at all. Just a lot of presumptions based on 15 year old, outdated assumptions.
Click to expand...

No evidence? Umm. There's currently a trial over whether he acted wrongly. There is evidence.
 
ApexDeac said:
There is no evidence that GZ instigated the confrontation (aside from "following" or asking a question). The violence started with fists. TM's trust in his physique and fighting skills gave him the "courage" and "bravado" to put a beat-down on someone with lesser skills. Your solution is for folks like GZ to live in fear. This is exactly what guns are for.

If GZ had been a woman, would you have the same opinion?
Click to expand...

You say there's no evidence and proceed to identify one piece of evidence immediately thereafter. I hate to break it to everyone, but there's a trial here because there is evidence that supports the prosecution's case. It may not be enough for a conviction, but there's evidence.
 
bobknightfan said:
As I told you previously in a negrep, you're nuts. And with 6 posts in more than two years, you're also obviously an additional parody of someone already posting on this board. Why don't you show your real face? Are you ashamed of the positions you are taking?
Click to expand...

Whatever (and I think you are nuts, so there). Unlike others, I don't give a flip about my post count. I've been reading the boards for more than a decade and had hundreds of posts on the other board, but I was not concerned that they transferred anywhere. I think they were reset more than once over there too. WGAF. Argue on the merits of something, not by trying to cut down the person with irrelevant BS.

Here is a pointer to who I am. I'm not ashamed at all about mentioning that we have laws that prevent beat-downs. Are you ashamed that the ends justify the means for you and that you twist them to meet your political aims?

apexdeac.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ball State Deac said:
You say there's no evidence and proceed to identify one piece of evidence immediately thereafter. I hate to break it to everyone, but there's a trial here because there is evidence that supports the prosecution's case. It may not be enough for a conviction, but there's evidence.
Click to expand...

What evidence is there that GZ started the physical fight? There is evidence that he called the cops, that he followed TM, and, obviously, that he killed TM, but nothing about who started the fight. There is also evidence (pretty compelling) that places TM on top of GZ providing a beat down. There is also evidence that TM had ample time to 'escape', but chose not to.

You are correct, that is why there is a trial. I think it's fine that there is a trial on manslaughter (though I think murder 2 was a political fabrication). My point is that there are a lot of people that like to gloss over the physical portion of the fight in order to focus on the political things like "profiling".
 
Ball State Deac said:
You say there's no evidence and proceed to identify one piece of evidence immediately thereafter. I hate to break it to everyone, but there's a trial here because there is evidence that supports the prosecution's case. It may not be enough for a conviction, but there's evidence.
Click to expand...

Yea, there is evidence. There is evidence of George Zimmerman asking a question of a 6 foot 2 and 175 man, in the dark, wearing a hood and peering into homes in a neighborhood he does not live in.

The evidence thus far has shown that Trayvon initially fled and George returned to find a spot to meet police. Trayvon returned to confront the "creepy ass cracker" and then sucker punched George to get his eyes wet. That's what you do. You dot that nose and fucks with a mans vision. Clearly George is not the wild and consumed watchman for he does not have his weapon drawn. Trayvon jumped out and confronted George, struck him, got him on the ground and proceeded to continue beating on Zimmerman. Zimmerman shot Trayvon in a clear cut case of self defense.
 
Where is the evidence that Martin was peeking into houses?
 
The reason ham GZ is on trial is because there is a dead body and he admitted to pulling the trigger. He is not on trial because there is evidence that he started the altercation.
 
The evidence is circumstantial, but there is evidence, primarily that he followed and confronted TM. The jurors are permitted to draw reasonable inferences from that evidence.

If GZ didn't act in self-defense, murder 2 would be an appropriate verdict.
 
Ball State Deac said:
The evidence is circumstantial, but there is evidence, primarily that he followed and confronted TM. The jurors are permitted to draw reasonable inferences from that evidence.

If GZ didn't act in self-defense, murder 2 would be an appropriate verdict.
Click to expand...

There is zero evidence that Zimmerman followed and confronted Martin. He got out of his car to ask the guy what he was doing. The guy ran then returned -- unless you want to tell me that Trayvon could not outrun Zimmerman and that bad ass Georgie "walked him down".

This whole case was driven by race baiters seeking a political end
 
Lectro said:
Yea, there is evidence. There is evidence of George Zimmerman asking a question of a 6 foot 2 and 175 man, in the dark, wearing a hood and peering into homes in a neighborhood he does not live in.

The evidence thus far has shown that Trayvon initially fled and George returned to find a spot to meet police. Trayvon returned to confront the "creepy ass cracker" and then sucker punched George to get his eyes wet. That's what you do. You dot that nose and fucks with a mans vision. Clearly George is not the wild and consumed watchman for he does not have his weapon drawn. Trayvon jumped out and confronted George, struck him, got him on the ground and proceeded to continue beating on Zimmerman. Zimmerman shot Trayvon in a clear cut case of self defense.
Click to expand...

A jury could draw those inferences, they could also conclude that Zimmerman was the aggressor. This case isn't nearly as clear cut as you want it to be.
 
Lectro said:
There is zero evidence that Zimmerman followed and confronted Martin. He got out of his car to ask the guy what he was doing. The guy ran then returned -- unless you want to tell me that Trayvon could not outrun Zimmerman and that bad ass Georgie "walked him down".

This whole case was driven by race baiters seeking a political end
Click to expand...

"he got out of the car to ask the guy"

That's confronting someone.
 
According to a police report, there was "no indication that Trayvon Martin was involved in any criminal activity at the time of the encounter".
 
Ball State Deac said:
Did the defense not call Lectro as an expert profiler? Big mistake.
Click to expand...

Nope...everyone decided they knew the "depraved mind of the stalker", George Zimmerman. They dissected his background and scoured the earth to find some smoking gun as to the origin of his "hatred" of blacks.

They couldn't really find anything.

So, I decided to have a look at Trayvon's past and so I set aside my pocket pic of him as a twelve year old and it was not long before I saw a very different person. The picture of innocence was broken when I saw his school record, the expulsions, the dismissal from home by his mom, his online pictures of street fighting, multiple references to using "the lean" (purple juice, essentially), the pic of his handgun, his texts including his cousin's which told of Trayvon swinging at a bus driver... and it goes on and on.

You give a damn what color he is...I don't. If he were one of the many multiple thousands of white punks then I'd be doing the same. Speaking truth.
 
avalon said:
That certainly attests to George's state of mind. What about evidence that Martin was peeking into houses?
Click to expand...

The Defense attorney came close yesterday...he stated that George saw Trayvon looking around a vacant house that had been robbed two weeks previous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top