trayvan martin

[UncleBuck]

If i was suspiciously walking around in a (key words here) gated community with my hood up id expect to be questioned, outside of a gated community i wouldn't expect it so much.
Who the fuck is trayvon to ask zimmerman to identify himself when trayvon was walking around a gated community with his hood up.
If trayvon had any sort of brains he would have realized that, and simply should've said "im walking to my dads right up the street". Or something as simple as that, and then this thread and bigotry wouldnt be here right now, so i blame trayvon's punk ass attitude.

nice bigotry there. more of this "martin is guilty" crapola. he was guilty of what? walking around with a hood on while it was raining. and running away from a creep who was following. zimm looks like a lot like a pederast for what it's worth.

hoodies in the rain: super suspicious!

fact is that zimm had several chances to ask martin where he was going, what he was doing, and identifying himself as neighborhood watch captain. he did none of those things despite ample opportunity. if he would have just done that, martin would be alive today.

"ultimately avoidable by zimmerman"

 

[UncleBuck]

No he doesnt have to ask shit, maybe was a little paranoid as well because of recent break-ins in the area.
But he did not break the law or anything of the sort and in all honesty was the first line of defense against another B & E, because he is the neighborhood watch captain, so technically he is a watcher and had every right to do what he did and i back him for that. He would be a fucking local hero right now had he caught trayvon attempting a B & E.
So Zimm did nothing wrong.
Why do you think there is neighborhood watch? cops arent always around especially in a crime ridden florida.

zimm did break the law by stalking an innocent kid.

and you said it, he's supposed to be a watcher, not a "chase you around several times and follow you home-er". residents of the complex often complained about zimm following them home.

fucking creep.

 

[NoDrama]

nice bigotry there. more of this "martin is guilty" crapola. he was guilty of what? walking around with a hood on while it was raining. and running away from a creep who was following. zimm looks like a lot like a pederast for what it's worth.

hoodies in the rain: super suspicious!

fact is that zimm had several chances to ask martin where he was going, what he was doing, and identifying himself as neighborhood watch captain. he did none of those things despite ample opportunity. if he would have just done that, martin would be alive today.

"ultimately avoidable by zimmerman"

Where is the law that states you must ask your questions at the first possible moment?

 

[UncleBuck]

Every person in this country has the authority and right to ask another person a question. And every person also has a right to tell them to pound sand, but you don't have the right to attack them for the question.

except zimm did not ask martin a thing given several opportunities to do so.

instead, he stalked the innocent kid and chased him around.

 

[NoDrama]

zimm did break the law by stalking an innocent kid.

and you said it, he's supposed to be a watcher, not a "chase you around several times and follow you home-er". residents of the complex often complained about zimm following them home.

fucking creep.

In order to watch someone you need to keep them in sight, it might mean you have to change where you are in order to do that. But ultimately what law is codified that makes watching someone a crime? Its gonna be really hard to convict someone who hasn't broken any laws.

 

[UncleBuck]

A lot of people were referring to Trayvon as a "kid". I simply pointed out that 17 is not really a "kid". Maturity aside, at 17, a person is within a year of being able to die for their country, vote for president, give consent, be married without parental consent, etc. He was a minor, or a young man. Hardly what I would consider a "kid".

17 years old is a kid, not an adult. sorry to ust up your "martin is guilty of....something" line of reasoning.

martin was an innocent kid walking home from the store who was stalked and chased and shot dead by a mentally unbalanced man.

 

[UncleBuck]

His girlfriend told him to run away, he said he wasn't going to run. Yet you guys keep describing the thing as Zimmerman "chasing" Martin. Following is not chasing.

zimmerman says he ran. witnesses describe a chase.

go cry in your corn flakes.

 

[UncleBuck]

Best post in over 700 pages.

gee, ya suppose is zimm had actually done that and asked martin a question, instead of stalking him and chasing him, things would have turned out different?



hence, "ultimately avoidable by zimmerman".

 

[UncleBuck]

Unfounded? Zimmerman had injuries. He had one opportunity, at which point he did ask. And was allegedly attacked.

you said martin attacked zimmerman, which is unfounded. you might as well assert that zimmerman attacked martin. makes more sense that it happened that way as martin was fleeing and zimm was the aggressor.

he had three opportunities: the initial contact, when martin drew his suspicion to call dispatch. he did not ask anything then.

the second contact, when martin wandered up to zimm's truck, parked directly in martin's path home.

and finally, after chasing him down, he aggressively and dominantly asked him on the final contact. "dominant" is how witnesses described zimm's voice.

 

[NoDrama]

17 years old is a kid, not an adult. sorry to ust up your "martin is guilty of....something" line of reasoning.

martin was an innocent kid walking home from the store who was stalked and chased and shot dead by a mentally unbalanced man.

The law routinely treats underage minors as adults all the time, your argument has no relevancy to the case though. Unless you are trying to make the case that children cannot hurt adults and have no capacity for physical violence.

 

[UncleBuck]

We figured it out already...Zimmerman asked Trayvon questions while holding him at gun point..Trayvon said "Fuck You". Zimmerman Grab him and tried to pull his pants down. Trayvon started standing his ground to defend himself against the creepy pervert. Zimmerman started losing in his attempted rape and just shot Trayvon..yup that could have happened.

probably did happen, zimm looks like a pederast.

 

[UncleBuck]

With trayvons gangsta attitude and appeal im sure his pants were already well below his ass sagging from day to day like all them gangsta's.

that's not what the 7/11 tape showed, but way to display your stereotyping, bigotry, and prejudice, mr. bigot with the overpriced crap weed.

 

[NoDrama]

you said martin attacked zimmerman, which is unfounded.

If it were unfounded than the police who arrived seconds after, MUST have seen Zimm beat his own head against the pavement and then punch himslef in the nose, plus all those witnesses that yoiu say saw everything. LOL, the fact that he has injuries is all the proof needed to prove he was attacked by martin.

 

[UncleBuck]

Where is the law that states you must ask your questions at the first possible moment?

there isn't, but everyone seems to have this absurd belief that zimm was just trying to ask martin a question. that wasn't the case, we know it wasn't.

which is why the whole thing was deemed to be "ultimately avoidable by zimmerman", among other reasons.

 

[UncleBuck]

The law routinely treats underage minors as adults all the time, your argument has no relevancy to the case though. Unless you are trying to make the case that children cannot hurt adults and have no capacity for physical violence.

17 years old is not an adult unless you are on trial for something.

martin was innocent, just walking home from the store with some skittles and iced tea. no crime.

 

[UncleBuck]

If it were unfounded than the police who arrived seconds after, MUST have seen Zimm beat his own head against the pavement and then punch himslef in the nose, plus all those witnesses that yoiu say saw everything. LOL, the fact that he has injuries is all the proof needed to prove he was attacked by martin.

you don't get it, do you?

we get it, he has some very minor injuries consistent with getting hit once or twice.

but when people say "martin attacked zimmerman", they are subtly trying to assign who aggressed who. it is just as likely that zimm attacked martin first and martin defended himself. that would make more sense, since martin was an innocent kid who was trying to run away from the mentally unbalanced man with a gun.

 

[doc111]

17 years old is a kid, not an adult. sorry to ust up your "martin is guilty of....something" line of reasoning.

martin was an innocent kid walking home from the store who was stalked and chased and shot dead by a mentally unbalanced man.

Where have I said "Martin is guilty of..........something"? I'm sorry we don't all agree with you Buck. Wouldn't the world be a much nicer place.............for YOU? I've never said "Martin was guilty of anything"! I've said he MAY have been up to no good. I've said he MAY have attacked Zimmerman first. It's also just as possible that Zimmerman is guilty of a cold blooded murder just because. I haven't seen a whole lot of evidence to the latter, but I have seen some evidence that suggests the previous 2 possiblities MAY be accurate. Zimmerman enjoys the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The state has the burden of proof, not Zimmerman. It would be the same if you were in Zimmerman's shoes, and I would be saying the same things. Defending Zimmerman? You can think it all you want, but there is an awful lot of vitriol directed at a man who nobody here knows, nor do they know what he or Martin were thinking, or what REALLY happened that night. There is a lot of conjecture and hypotheticals, but nobody REALLY knows PRECISELY what happened. It's very likely that we never will and THAT is a shame, but Zimmerman is a human being too and one that you have all judged without knowing all the details or the man. It may make you feel big to cast judgement on someone so reviled, but I don't go along with the crowd because it's the popular thing to do.

 

[UncleBuck]

Where have I said "Martin is guilty of..........something"?

you keep implying it all day long.

meanwhile, you make sure to handle zimm with kiddie gloves.

again, i'm sure you would be saying the same if it were your kid. right? of course you would.

 

[Growman3001]

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/16/what-zimmerman-martin-medical-reports-tell-us-and-media-didnt/

Makes you think...
But by Fox so it makes you think again....

 

[NoDrama]

you don't get it, do you?

we get it, he has some very minor injuries consistent with getting hit once or twice.

but when people say "martin attacked zimmerman", they are subtly trying to assign who aggressed who. it is just as likely that zimm attacked martin first and martin defended himself. that would make more sense, since martin was an innocent kid who was trying to run away from the mentally unbalanced man with a gun.

The only injuries to martin are a single gunshot wound and scraped knuckles consistent with pummeling someone, Zimm never attacked him, if he had the evidence would show it.