quote:

Originally posted by crazituna so the pictures from trays phone mean nothing. holding guns, stolen property? why is this just one sided, why can't you see both sides?

Because that is speculation, and it is not allowed in a court (or shouldn't be allowed). Futhermore, Martin was not on trial, so presenting that evidence when the witness can't defend themselves, to disparage the victim is slightly unethical (though not so much that it'd be an ethical violation most likely).

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On What was one-sided was the will to paint the other as a thug, as a criminal, as a timebomb. None of George Zimmerman's criminal past and public character was ever admitted into the trial; just that of a fucking minor. Like has been said, Prosecution botched this.

Neither was trayvon past

It's clear Zimmerman has some guilt in this situation but it could not be proved since Martin did attack Zimmerman which turned it into a self defense case. But for a long while now he will be haunted by his crime.

He knows he was clearly looking for trouble when he left the car and everyone including himself knows this. But it's not what you know, it's what you can prove.

___________________

But the subsequent collision of fools...
Well versed in the subtle art of slavery.

quote:

Originally posted by crazituna Neither was trayvon past

Yes, it was; Trayvon's character and persona were brought into question, in an effort to paint him as a menacing, young, black male we all just knewwww was up to no good! Whereas George Zimmerman had a history of federal charges brought against him and public flouting of their nature, they were conveniently ignored as the Defense put a dead kid on trial for his own killing. He was just asking for it with those skittles, you know?

If anything, this trial illustrates the ridiculous provisions that self-defense laws and concealed-carry laws grant when they overlap. Those who are legally armed outside of their own homes should be held to a completely different standard than a presumably unarmed pedestrian.

Zimmerman had been taking MMA classes at a local gym for over a year, even though his teachers there described him as a flabby mess even after the training; it's not hard to see that he was a man who felt he had something to prove, and so picked on a lone youth who either threw the first punch or was merely defending himself from this creepy fat guy in the dark of night. Either way, Zimmerman came armed, knew he had the upper-hand, and engaged this person anyway. At best, it is active vigilantism, and the fact that it is now tolerated by precedent is a damning thing of the Florida legal system.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Because that is speculation, and it is not allowed in a court (or shouldn't be allowed). Futhermore, Martin was not on trial, so presenting that evidence when the witness can't defend themselves, to disparage the victim is slightly unethical (though not so much that it'd be an ethical violation most likely).

what speculation? they came from his phone. it works both ways. the pictures can show that trayvon was not the little boy everyone wants to believe. but just anther thug who started a fight he could not finish.

why does zimmerman not have a right to question someone who is walking around in the middle of the night in his complex that he does not know. seems to me he was just looking out for his fellow neighbors. or did we forget about the burgleries and robberies that where happening there?

what happened is sad, in the end no one really won anything. i really could not give a fuck about the case, just mad at the way the media is playing it. all i here is alot of opinions but no facts.

quote:

Originally posted by crazituna but just anther thug who started a fight he could not finish.

We'll never know who started the fight as there is no conclusive evidence either way. But who was pursuing whom? Who chased after someone knowing they had the upper-hand? Zimmerman hunted Trayvon, and when he couldn't handle the reaction of a youth being stalked at night in a civil manner, he resorted to bloodshed. This is not a man innocent of slaughter.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by crazituna what speculation? they came from his phone. it works both ways. the pictures can show that trayvon was not the little boy everyone wants to believe. but just anther thug who started a fight he could not finish. why does zimmerman not have a right to question someone who is walking around in the middle of the night in his complex that he does not know. seems to me he was just looking out for his fellow neighbors. or did we forget about the burgleries and robberies that where happening there? what happened is sad, in the end no one really won anything. i really could not give a fuck about the case, just mad at the way the media is playing it. all i here is alot of opinions but no facts.

Can you agree that Zimmerman was at least looking for trouble? He was determined to not let this one get away like all the others.

___________________

But the subsequent collision of fools...
Well versed in the subtle art of slavery.

It's not even necessary to speculate on his intentions (as I am all to eager to do, myself). Even in Texas - TEXAS! - concealed carry holders are only allowed to use deadly force when there is absolutely no other alternative. Zimmerman had numerous alternatives, and brashly ignored every one of them in order to play Cop.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On We'll never know who started the fight as there is no conclusive evidence either way. But who was pursuing whom? Who chased after someone knowing they had the upper-hand? Zimmerman hunted Trayvon, and when he couldn't handle the reaction of a youth being stalked at night in a civil manner, he resorted to bloodshed. This is not a man innocent of slaughter.

did you even watch the trial, or are you assuming all this? you seem to be missing some facts.

I was actually there, I just didn't decide to come public until this exceedingly important debate on tranceaddict.com cropped up.

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

quote:

Originally posted by Desiderata Can you agree that Zimmerman was at least looking for trouble? He was determined to not let this one get away like all the others.

yes he was looking for trayvon, i would do the same. if i saw someone snooping around mine or my neighbors back yards, 100% i'm going to ask them who they are and why are they here. it's called being a good neighbor. the correct response from trayvon should have been to identify himself not beat the cracker ass homo he thought zimmerman was. did we forget rachel jeantel testimony