George Zimmerman arrested for aggravated assault

[Mark Antony]

Cmon lets post the innocent picture of trayvon when he played for Miami gardens optimist football team as a 13 y/o

NT is slacking

What's your other user name?

c0w4Rd.

When it's a Black teen/young adult, everything wrong he's ever done in life is used as justification for being murdered

but zimmerman's past of abuse and assault of a police officer doesn't matter?

If someone has no respect and will attack his own wife and an officer of the law, why is it so hard to believe he would start something with a teen?

Like I said don't be selective with your outrage. You can't tell people in one thread that they have to respect cops and then in this thread defend a guy who has no respect for cops.

It's so comical at this point, not worth paying attention to.

 

[va757va]

dude has double the amount of posts than anyone else in here.  you know what they say about the loudest dude in a room.

Just ignore him.  He is derailing threads and rustling jimmies..hes getting exactly what he wants.

 

[heliumclinton]

The same who called the police. I'm not going to spoon feed you information like a baby, so if you don't know what you're talking about don't reply. 

There was one witness who called the cops and testified in that trial that one person was on top of the other but he wasn't sure who because it was dark and raining.

Multiple witnesses saw what happen? Lies it was one

Witnesses saying Trayvon was on top of GZ? More lies

 

[Master Zik]

Nobody who kills an unarmed person is innocent.

Wrong True. 

Doesn't surprise me that you don't know what words mean. Like this post I just quoted.

Let me correct you again.

 

[me662ll a]

Or he's trying to address multiple posters...

You know NT doesn't use logic. Stop with that. 

There was one witness who called the cops and testified in that trial that one person was on top of the other but he wasn't sure who because it was dark and raining.

Multiple witnesses saw what happen? Lies it was one

Witnesses saying Trayvon was on top of GZ? More lies

This witness who identified himself as "John" stated that the man in red was calling to him for help, as well as a 13 year old kid also saw a man on the ground before the shooting, and identified him as wearing red.

Doesn't surprise me that you don't know what words mean. Like this post I just quoted.

Let me correct you again.

I know exactly what they mean, and I'm not saying that courts never get it wrong, but when you're found not guilty that means you're innocent of the charges against you. It's a pretty simple concept, so try to keep up. In my opinion the court got it right, and he is not only not guilty, but also innocent. Your tin foil hat speculation on what happened as opposed to the facts are irrelevant. 

 

[tireless drive]

Whatever happened to Zimmerman getting in the ring with DMX

 

[heliumclinton]

Let's also ignore all the witnesses who saw Trayvon on top of GZ beating him. 

This witness who identified himself as "John" stated that the man in red was calling to him for help, as well as a 13 year old kid also saw a man on the ground before the shooting, and identified him as wearing red.

So far

1. John: heard somebody calling for help thinks it was a red shirt
2. Austin Mclendon: saw one person laying on the ground calling for help, never saw a second body, never stated if it was before or after a gunshot (thanks for adding that to fit your agenda)

These are all the witnesses who saw Trayvon on top George Zimmerman beating him huh? Oh ok

 

[me662ll a]

So far

1. John: heard somebody calling for help thinks it was a red shirt
2. Austin Mclendon: saw one person laying on the ground calling for help, never saw a second body, never stated if it was before or after a gunshot (thanks for adding that to fit your agenda)

These are all the witnesses who saw Trayvon on top George Zimmerman beating him huh? Oh ok

Nothing was added. I stated very clearly that the kid saw him on the ground and saw him wearing red.

Thanks for adding that in to try and hurt my argument as opposed to coming up with your own. 

 

[heliumclinton]

2 statements from third-party witnesses, which seem to coincide.

That holds a lot of weight.

So which part did you miss about neither of those statements saying anything about Trayvon Martin beating up George Zimmerman?One of these witnesses did not testify in the trial. I can show you two other witnesses who didn't testify and say the complete opposite, I guess that would hold weight too huh? Shut up

So far


1. John: heard somebody calling for help thinks it was a red shirt

2. Austin Mclendon: saw one person laying on the ground calling for help, never saw a second body, never stated if it was before or after a gunshot (thanks for adding that to fit your agenda)


These are all the witnesses who saw Trayvon on top George Zimmerman beating him huh? Oh ok

Nothing was added. I stated very clearly that the kid saw him on the ground and saw him wearing red.

Thanks for adding that in to try and hurt my argument as opposed to coming up with your own. 

" as well as a 13 year old kid also saw a man on the ground before the shooting"

Before the shooting huh? You didn't add that right?

You're a liar and not to mention you're using a witness who did not testify in this trial. You have yet to quote all of the witnesses who said they saw Trayvon Martin beating up George Zimmerman.

 

[me662ll a]

You're right, that was meant only for 'John.' 

What the kid saw still doesn't help your stance. 

 

[heliumclinton]

You're right, that was meant only for 'John.' 

What the kid saw still doesn't help your stance. 

The kid saw one person lying on the ground screaming help in a red shirt, made no mention of a second person.

Again, where are "all the witnesses that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman beating him" that you are claiming?

John nor Austin stated that

 

[me662ll a]

John described what he thought may have been a dog attack, and wrestling. You're right in the fact that it was too dark for him to see a 'beating' but what these witnesses saw still severely hurts your case, so what's your point? Are you just going go say that these witnesses are lying in what they did see? 

WhatCanISay's post is also on the internet, and verifying either depends on who's side you want to believe I suppose. I'm not watching Johns 2 hour testimony any time soon though. 

 

[sooperhooper]

They won't be satisfied until he kills someone else.

 

[heliumclinton]

"Under cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer, Good said he believes he saw Martin on top punching Zimmerman "MMA style," a reference to mixed martial arts.

"The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara.

"Correct", said Good."

The person on top was hitting the person on bottom, thanks for the quote. He couldn't identify who was on top and who was on bottom. A judge would never allow Good to state "I believe Martin was punching Zimmerman" when as your friend just stated he testified it was too dark for him to see.

1. "believe" is speculation
2. he just testified he couldn't see

so what's your point?

My point is you were incorrect stating "Let's also ignore all the witnesses who saw Trayvon on top of GZ beating him."

1. Witnesses is plural, you have not provided more than one witness
2. Your lone witness never stated he saw Trayvon Martin beating George Zimmerman

Again just in case you still don't get my point. You were wrong. You went from being specific, to saying "yeah you're right only one witness said that" to "well he actually said it was too dark to see a beating but so what"

You're full of it

 

[me662ll a]

I already admitted being wrong, but there's still something there with the witnesses and you refuse to address it. 

Are you saying that what they did see are lies? What they saw wasn't irrelevant so what's your take on it? 

 

[Master Zik]

Doesn't surprise me that you don't know what words mean. Like this post I just quoted.


Let me correct you again.

I know exactly what they mean

No. You clearly do not.

Your tin foil hat speculation on what happened as opposed to the facts are irrelevant.

This never happened but given your poor recollection, not knowing what words mean, and penchant for making **** up again it is no surprise that you'd say something like this as if you could ever provide proof of it.

 

[dh1water]

Dude defines real life troll.  after getting off with trayvon you'd think the dude would be laying low, hiding...but nope! Then again you also have to understand that this dude has a perma-target on his chest...I'm actually shocked he's still alive lol

 

[heliumclinton]

I already admitted being wrong, but there's still something there with the witnesses and you refuse to address it. 

Are you saying that what they did see are lies? What they saw wasn't irrelevant so what's your take on it? 

Yes, a witness that didn't testify at the trial is irrelevant to me.

The only witness I have a opinion on is Good. He said he heard someone yelling for help so he looked out his window. He saw one person on top of another person but couldn't tell who was who. Now I don't know how you were able to conclude how the whole scenario took place from that sentence but I can't

The back of Zimmerman's coat and pants being wet, with grass on it as well, testified by a Police Officer just went right over his head.

You're repeating this like Trayvon's hoody and pants weren't wet

 

[heliumclinton]

Dude stating George Zimmerman's clothes were wet like it wasn't raining outside

 

[me662ll a]

No. You clearly do not.
This never happened but given your poor recollection, not knowing what words mean, and penchant for making **** up again it is no surprise that you'd say something like this as if you could ever provide proof of it.

Unless you're of the opinion that killing in self defense is always murder no matter what, you're wrong and he is still innocent no matter what you think. 

 

[Master Zik]

No. You clearly do not.

This never happened but given your poor recollection, not knowing what words mean, and penchant for making **** up again it is no surprise that you'd say something like this as if you could ever provide proof of it.

Unless you're of the opinion that killing in self defense is always murder no matter what, you're wrong and he is still innocent no matter what you think. 

This is an example of you know not knowing what words mean and on top of that it's you making assumptions due to limited knowledge on the subject, that subject simply being the definition of certain words. Until you learn more as I've already said there is no argument here. Just me correcting you.

So when you say "you're wrong and he is still innocent" it just reaffirms what I've already said.

 

[heliumclinton]

Apparently, now it rains grass.

Apparently, next time I get grass on my pants I should know I was attacked.

 

[heliumclinton]

I sure hope you're not trying to insinuate that the only way you can get grass on your pants is to be on top of somebody. That would be odd

Where's the photographic evidence of Zimmerman's jacket and pants having grass on his back? Don't worry I'll wait

No blood from Zimmerman on Trayvon's hands or sleeves, no DNA from Zimmerman under Trayvon's nails, no injuries or bruises on Trayvon's hands.

MMA style

 

[me662ll a]

This is an example of you know not knowing what words mean and on top of that it's you making assumptions due to limited knowledge on the subject, that subject simply being the definition of certain words. Until you learn more as I've already said there is no argument here. Just me correcting you.

So when you say "you're wrong and he is still innocent" it just reaffirms what I've already said.

I know exactly what the words mean. If he isn't 'innocent' in your book, then what is he guilty of? 

 

[heliumclinton]

So, the jury, witnesses and defense attorneys were wrong.

You're right.

Sorry about that. Let me stop "insinuating" factual evidence and witness testimonies for you.

One witness said that was GZ screaming help

Another witness said it was Trayvon screaming help

@ witness testimony being factual evidence

I'm off this. Dudes speculating, assuming, and conjuring their own conclusions with no facts, no proof, no physical evidence .. just words. Pathetic