Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Yet another Zimmerman screwup
26 views
Skip to first unread message
VegasJerry
Apr 6, 2012, 12:07:30 PM4/6/12
to
Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
NOT carry a gun.
________________________________________________________________________
Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
NOT carry a gun.
________________________________________________________________________
mo_ntresor
Apr 6, 2012, 12:11:50 PM4/6/12
to
On Apr 6 2012 10:07 AM, VegasJerry wrote:
> Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> NOT carry a gun.
did the police mention what we can and can't say on usenet? i'd hate to
> Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> NOT carry a gun.
break their rules.
mo_ntresor
_____________________________________________________________________
popinjay999
Apr 6, 2012, 12:16:42 PM4/6/12
to
On Apr 6, 9:07 am, "VegasJerry" <jerr...@cox.net> wrote:
> Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> NOT carry a gun.
>
Sure, and they're just NOW saying that? Sounds like a good lie to
> Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> NOT carry a gun.
>
cover their asses, eh, Jerry? And you know how THAT works, eh, Jerry?
Of course, even if the cops did instruct like that at the Neighborhood
Watch meetings, that still doesn't have anything to do with whether a
person can defend themselves when they're getting their head pounded
on the cement.
So strut away, pigeon.
Puppytoes
Apr 6, 2012, 12:48:36 PM4/6/12
to
_______________________________________________________________________
Will in New Haven
Apr 6, 2012, 1:10:52 PM4/6/12
to
On Apr 6, 12:07 pm, "VegasJerry" <jerr...@cox.net> wrote:
> Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> NOT carry a gun.
I suppose members of a Neighborhood Watch are under more police
> Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> NOT carry a gun.
authority than the rest of us but I don't usually consider
instructions from a police officer to have the force of law.
--
Will in New Haven
Mossingen
Apr 6, 2012, 1:28:02 PM4/6/12
to
"VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:2vg359x...@app-01.ezprovider.com...
> Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> NOT carry a gun.
Good detective work, Jerry. Any other general advice from the police that
was ignored by any party in this case?
news:2vg359x...@app-01.ezprovider.com...
> Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> NOT carry a gun.
was ignored by any party in this case?
VegasJerry
Apr 6, 2012, 4:03:35 PM4/6/12
to
On Apr 6 2012 9:16 AM, popinjay999 wrote:
> On Apr 6, 9:07 am, "VegasJerry" <jerr...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> > Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> > NOT carry a gun.
> >
>
>
> Sure, and they're just NOW saying that?
No, they said it was a part of their Neighborhood Watch instructions they
>
> > Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> > Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> > NOT carry a gun.
> >
>
>
> Sure, and they're just NOW saying that?
gave.
> Sounds like a good lie to cover their asses, eh, Jerry?
Jerry 'n Vegas
And you know how THAT works, eh, Jerry?
>
> Of course, even if the cops did instruct like that at the Neighborhood
> Watch meetings, that still doesn't have anything to do with whether a
> person can defend themselves when they're getting their head pounded
> on the cement.
>
> So strut away, pigeon.
Pepe Papon
Apr 8, 2012, 2:37:23 AM4/8/12
to
On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 09:07:30 -0700, "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net>
wrote:
>Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
>Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
>NOT carry a gun.
OK, let's say they did. Does that make Zimmerman guilty of murder?
wrote:
>Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
>Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
>NOT carry a gun.
VegasJerry
Apr 8, 2012, 11:37:08 AM4/8/12
to
after it was 'only suggested' he not follow, by the 911 Operator.
Jerry
____________________________________________________________________
Mossingen
Apr 8, 2012, 3:23:17 PM4/8/12
to
"VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:4un859x...@app-01.ezprovider.com...
> On Apr 7 2012 11:37 PM, Pepe Papon wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 09:07:30 -0700, "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
>> >Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
>> >NOT carry a gun.
>>
>> OK, let's say they did. Does that make Zimmerman guilty of murder?
>
> No. This is about those that claim it was okay for Zimmerman to follow
> after it was 'only suggested' he not follow, by the 911 Operator.
911 operators give advice to make things easier for cops, not to impact
>
>> On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 09:07:30 -0700, "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
>> >Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
>> >NOT carry a gun.
>>
>> OK, let's say they did. Does that make Zimmerman guilty of murder?
>
> No. This is about those that claim it was okay for Zimmerman to follow
> after it was 'only suggested' he not follow, by the 911 Operator.
things at the scene. Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights and duties
as a neighborhood watchman to follow the kid and inquire.
The murky part is what happened at that point. Did Zimmerman act overly
aggressive in doing so, or did Martin overreact with violence at being
questioned? That's the part that is important.
You are hung up on the fact that you consider a 911 operator a police
officer and therefore, anyone who does not follow the directives of a police
officer did something wrong..
Pepe Papon
Apr 9, 2012, 2:43:06 AM4/9/12
to
On Sun, 08 Apr 2012 08:37:08 -0700, "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net>
wrote:
>On Apr 7 2012 11:37 PM, Pepe Papon wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 09:07:30 -0700, "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
>> >Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
>> >NOT carry a gun.
>>
>> OK, let's say they did. Does that make Zimmerman guilty of murder?
>
>No. This is about those that claim it was okay for Zimmerman to follow
>after it was 'only suggested' he not follow, by the 911 Operator.
Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
wrote:
>On Apr 7 2012 11:37 PM, Pepe Papon wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 09:07:30 -0700, "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
>> >Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
>> >NOT carry a gun.
>>
>> OK, let's say they did. Does that make Zimmerman guilty of murder?
>
>No. This is about those that claim it was okay for Zimmerman to follow
>after it was 'only suggested' he not follow, by the 911 Operator.
Edward A. Falk
Apr 9, 2012, 11:54:32 AM4/9/12
to
In article <r615o7h54u6p87r7c...@4ax.com>,
does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
--
-Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
Pepe Papon <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
So the author of the "stand your ground" law says that it definitely
>
>Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
--
-Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
mo_ntresor
Apr 9, 2012, 12:10:06 PM4/9/12
to
On Apr 9 2012 9:54 AM, Edward A. Falk wrote:
> >Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
>
> So the author of the "stand your ground" law says that it definitely
> does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
> ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
> it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
another idiot heard from. let me guess, obama in 2012?
> >Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
>
> So the author of the "stand your ground" law says that it definitely
> does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
> ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
> it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
mo_ntresor
-------
VegasJerry
Apr 9, 2012, 5:19:51 PM4/9/12
to
On Apr 8 2012 12:23 PM, Mossingen wrote:
> "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:4un859x...@app-01.ezprovider.com...
> > On Apr 7 2012 11:37 PM, Pepe Papon wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 09:07:30 -0700, "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> >> >Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> >> >NOT carry a gun.
> >>
> >> OK, let's say they did. Does that make Zimmerman guilty of murder?
> >
> > No. This is about those that claim it was okay for Zimmerman to follow
> > after it was 'only suggested' he not follow, by the 911 Operator.
>
>
>
> 911 operators give advice to make things easier for cops, not to impact
> things at the scene. Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights and duties
> as a neighborhood watchman to follow the kid and inquire.
He was told, in a Neighborhood Watch class, by a training police officer,
> "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:4un859x...@app-01.ezprovider.com...
> > On Apr 7 2012 11:37 PM, Pepe Papon wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 09:07:30 -0700, "VegasJerry" <jer...@cox.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Gee, now the police say they give explicit instructions at Zimmerman's
> >> >Neighborhood Watch meetings that they were NOT to follow suspects and to
> >> >NOT carry a gun.
> >>
> >> OK, let's say they did. Does that make Zimmerman guilty of murder?
> >
> > No. This is about those that claim it was okay for Zimmerman to follow
> > after it was 'only suggested' he not follow, by the 911 Operator.
>
>
>
> 911 operators give advice to make things easier for cops, not to impact
> things at the scene. Zimmerman was perfectly within his rights and duties
> as a neighborhood watchman to follow the kid and inquire.
to not be armed and not follow.
> The murky part is what happened at that point. Did Zimmerman act overly
> aggressive in doing so, or did Martin overreact with violence at being
> questioned? That's the part that is important.
>
> You are hung up on the fact that you consider a 911 operator a police
> officer
operator was apperently a police officer as he answered the phone that way.
Jerry 'n Vegas
> and therefore, anyone who does not follow the directives of a police
> officer did something wrong..
Travel
Apr 9, 2012, 5:25:32 PM4/9/12
to
The police determined that Martin followed a retreating Zimmerman back to his (Zimmerman's) truck and attacked him. Zimmerman defended himself by shooting Martin: an act of self defense and no probable cause for arresting Zimmerman.
Why do you think that the left-wing media keeps showing Martin's grammar school pictures, and not his current 6' tall with tattoos pictures?
Also, there were about eight 911 calls by the neighbors for that fight.
Of course, the police followed up on all of this in their investigation, but the mainstream media doesn't report it. They just show you Al Sharpton.
Dutch
Apr 9, 2012, 6:48:28 PM4/9/12
to
"Travel" <trave...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4425047.115.1334006732101.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbut24...
story?
> Why do you think that the left-wing media keeps showing Martin's grammar
> school pictures, and not his current 6' tall with tattoos pictures?
The pictures are head shots how would his height or tattoos be apparent? And
how do those things justify homicide?
And he still has a baby face in more recent photos.
> Also, there were about eight 911 calls by the neighbors for that fight.
> Of course, the police followed up on all of this in their investigation,
> but the mainstream media doesn't report it. They just show you Al
> Sharpton.
Oh yeah, its all the fault of the Librul media.
news:4425047.115.1334006732101.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbut24...
> On Monday, April 9, 2012 11:54:32 AM UTC-4, Edward A. Falk wrote:
>> In article <r615o7h54u6p87r7c...@4ax.com>,
>> Pepe Papon <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
>>
>> So the author of the "stand your ground" law says that it definitely
>> does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
>> ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
>> it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
>>
>> --
>> -Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
>> http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
>
> The Castle Law, "or stand your ground," doesn't really apply to this case.
> This is a simple matter of self defense, where the Castle Law is more
> appropriate in the midst of an existing felony being carried-out: "home
> invasion," armed robbery, etc.
>
> The police determined that Martin followed a retreating Zimmerman back to
> his (Zimmerman's) truck and attacked him. Zimmerman defended himself by
> shooting Martin: an act of self defense and no probable cause for
> arresting Zimmerman.
How would they determine that, by listening to the shooter's self-serving
>> In article <r615o7h54u6p87r7c...@4ax.com>,
>> Pepe Papon <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
>>
>> So the author of the "stand your ground" law says that it definitely
>> does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
>> ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
>> it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
>>
>> --
>> -Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
>> http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
>
> The Castle Law, "or stand your ground," doesn't really apply to this case.
> This is a simple matter of self defense, where the Castle Law is more
> appropriate in the midst of an existing felony being carried-out: "home
> invasion," armed robbery, etc.
>
> The police determined that Martin followed a retreating Zimmerman back to
> his (Zimmerman's) truck and attacked him. Zimmerman defended himself by
> shooting Martin: an act of self defense and no probable cause for
> arresting Zimmerman.
story?
> Why do you think that the left-wing media keeps showing Martin's grammar
> school pictures, and not his current 6' tall with tattoos pictures?
how do those things justify homicide?
And he still has a baby face in more recent photos.
> Also, there were about eight 911 calls by the neighbors for that fight.
> Of course, the police followed up on all of this in their investigation,
> but the mainstream media doesn't report it. They just show you Al
> Sharpton.
Pepe Papon
Apr 10, 2012, 3:31:51 AM4/10/12
to
On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 15:54:32 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
Falk) wrote:
>In article <r615o7h54u6p87r7c...@4ax.com>,
>Pepe Papon <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
>
>So the author of the "stand your ground" law says that it definitely
>does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
>ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
>it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
You've made a huge leap of logic here. Several, actually.
Falk) wrote:
>In article <r615o7h54u6p87r7c...@4ax.com>,
>Pepe Papon <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
>
>So the author of the "stand your ground" law says that it definitely
>does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
>ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
>it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
For one, the topic was whether or not he disobeyed a police order.
Everything you said would be unaffected by whether or not a 911
operator told him to stop.
Secondly, the fact that he follwed Martin in no way implies that he
aggressively approached or confronted him. But that's exactly what
you're assuming.
Pepe Papon
Apr 10, 2012, 3:33:23 AM4/10/12
to
On Mon, 9 Apr 2012 15:48:28 -0700, "Dutch" <n...@email.com> wrote:
>> The police determined that Martin followed a retreating Zimmerman back to
>> his (Zimmerman's) truck and attacked him. Zimmerman defended himself by
>> shooting Martin: an act of self defense and no probable cause for
>> arresting Zimmerman.
>
>How would they determine that, by listening to the shooter's self-serving
>story?
They don't have to determine that. All they have to determine is
>> The police determined that Martin followed a retreating Zimmerman back to
>> his (Zimmerman's) truck and attacked him. Zimmerman defended himself by
>> shooting Martin: an act of self defense and no probable cause for
>> arresting Zimmerman.
>
>How would they determine that, by listening to the shooter's self-serving
>story?
whether sufficient evidence to press charges.
Travel
Apr 10, 2012, 12:10:12 PM4/10/12
to
On Monday, April 9, 2012 6:48:28 PM UTC-4, Dutch wrote:
> "Travel" <trave...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4425047.115.1334006732101.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbut24...
> > On Monday, April 9, 2012 11:54:32 AM UTC-4, Edward A. Falk wrote:
> >> In article <r615o7h54u6p87r7c...@4ax.com>,
> >> Pepe Papon <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
> >>
> >> So the author of the "stand your ground" law says that it definitely
> >> does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
> >> ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
> >> it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
> >>
> >> --
> >> -Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
> >> http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
> >
> > The Castle Law, "or stand your ground," doesn't really apply to this case.
> > This is a simple matter of self defense, where the Castle Law is more
> > appropriate in the midst of an existing felony being carried-out: "home
> > invasion," armed robbery, etc.
> >
> > The police determined that Martin followed a retreating Zimmerman back to
> > his (Zimmerman's) truck and attacked him. Zimmerman defended himself by
> > shooting Martin: an act of self defense and no probable cause for
> > arresting Zimmerman.
>
> How would they determine that, by listening to the shooter's self-serving
> story?
>
No, you idiot, they investigated the incident. Their conclusion was self defense and no evidence to the contrary. Fortunately, we live in a constitutional republic, and people can't just be arrested because a commie like Dutch wants them to be arrested.
> "Travel" <trave...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4425047.115.1334006732101.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbut24...
> > On Monday, April 9, 2012 11:54:32 AM UTC-4, Edward A. Falk wrote:
> >> In article <r615o7h54u6p87r7c...@4ax.com>,
> >> Pepe Papon <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Let's pretend it wasn't okay for him to do that. So what?
> >>
> >> So the author of the "stand your ground" law says that it definitely
> >> does not apply to Zimmerman in this case. Zimmerman *didn't* stand his
> >> ground, he actively pursued and confronted his victim. If anything,
> >> it's Treyvon Martin that had the right to stand his ground.
> >>
> >> --
> >> -Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
> >> http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
> >
> > The Castle Law, "or stand your ground," doesn't really apply to this case.
> > This is a simple matter of self defense, where the Castle Law is more
> > appropriate in the midst of an existing felony being carried-out: "home
> > invasion," armed robbery, etc.
> >
> > The police determined that Martin followed a retreating Zimmerman back to
> > his (Zimmerman's) truck and attacked him. Zimmerman defended himself by
> > shooting Martin: an act of self defense and no probable cause for
> > arresting Zimmerman.
>
> How would they determine that, by listening to the shooter's self-serving
> story?
>
> > Why do you think that the left-wing media keeps showing Martin's grammar
> > school pictures, and not his current 6' tall with tattoos pictures?
>
> The pictures are head shots how would his height or tattoos be apparent? And
> how do those things justify homicide?
>
> And he still has a baby face in more recent photos.
>
> > Also, there were about eight 911 calls by the neighbors for that fight.
> > Of course, the police followed up on all of this in their investigation,
> > but the mainstream media doesn't report it. They just show you Al
> > Sharpton.
>
> Oh yeah, its all the fault of the Librul media.
Dutch
Apr 10, 2012, 3:43:29 PM4/10/12
to
"Travel" <trave...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:18659240.300.1334074212176.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbhc14...
witnesses to the event, and initial police investigations are frequently
incomplete. Just because that could justify arresting him at the time does
NOT mean he is innocent. Unfortunately Trayvon wasn't around to give his
account of what took place, I'll bet it would be different.
>
>
>> > Why do you think that the left-wing media keeps showing Martin's
>> > grammar
>> > school pictures, and not his current 6' tall with tattoos pictures?
>>
>> The pictures are head shots how would his height or tattoos be apparent?
>> And
>
> No, dumbass, the face, itself, is obviously of a little kid.
Not to me, every photo I've seen looks like a teenager.
>
>> > Why do you think that the left-wing media keeps showing Martin's
>> > grammar
>> > school pictures, and not his current 6' tall with tattoos pictures?
>>
>> The pictures are head shots how would his height or tattoos be apparent?
>> And
>
> No, dumbass, the face, itself, is obviously of a little kid.
>> how do those things justify homicide?
>
> Who said they did? I saud that the media shows thses grammar scholl
> pictures to effect public opinion into thinking that Martin was a
> defenseless little kid asnd could not have possibly attacked Zimmerman.
> It's a total misrepresentation: a blatant lie.
>> And he still has a baby face in more recent photos.
>
> No he doesn't, dumbass. Ya know, reasonable argument is one thing, but
> you're basically just some dumb asshole.
asshole. How's that?
>
>>
>> > Also, there were about eight 911 calls by the neighbors for that fight.
>> > Of course, the police followed up on all of this in their
>> > investigation,
>> > but the mainstream media doesn't report it. They just show you Al
>> > Sharpton.
>>
>> Oh yeah, its all the fault of the Librul media.
>
> They're obviously at fault in misrepresenting/hiding the facts. Just like
> you.
What is obvious to you bears little resemblance to reality.
>>
>> > Also, there were about eight 911 calls by the neighbors for that fight.
>> > Of course, the police followed up on all of this in their
>> > investigation,
>> > but the mainstream media doesn't report it. They just show you Al
>> > Sharpton.
>>
>> Oh yeah, its all the fault of the Librul media.
>
> They're obviously at fault in misrepresenting/hiding the facts. Just like
> you.
Travel
Apr 11, 2012, 1:10:10 PM4/11/12
to
I have news for you, there was an independent eye witness that the police investigated. Plus, numerous 911 calls, of which the police followed-up. Zimmerman had physical injury. Try knowing what you're talking about before blithering.
>Just because that could justify arresting him at the time does
> NOT mean he is innocent.
Picture Dutch squealing if the situation was turned around and the black guy shot the white guy, the black guy said it was self defense but was arrested, anyway, with no evidence that it wasn't self defense.
> >> > Why do you think that the left-wing media keeps showing Martin's
> >> > grammar
> >> > school pictures, and not his current 6' tall with tattoos pictures?
> >>
> >> The pictures are head shots how would his height or tattoos be apparent?
> >> And
> >
> > No, dumbass, the face, itself, is obviously of a little kid.
>
> >> how do those things justify homicide?
> >
> > Who said they did? I said that the media shows these grammar school
> >
> > pictures to effect public opinion into thinking that Martin was a
> > defenseless little kid and could not have possibly attacked Zimmerman.
0 new messages