- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
this is where i disagree.
R.I.P Trayvon
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by shoefreakbaby,
- Start date
- 1,029
- 248
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2012
He had to, because it was people constantly bringing up Chicago as if that's the only city where murders occur. It's become a right wing talking point on Faux News.
It's a silly argument, yet idiots keep repeating it, because that's what the sheep were fed. Then they keep repeating it as if it's some brilliant and original point. You can't care about Sandy Hook if you didn't care about the all the kids poisoned by their lunches in India.
Because Zimmerman said so. He had absolutely no reason to lie, and has proven to be a noble and honest man.
He didnt have to he chose too, but I understand because he is the prez
Trayvon was not doing anything wrong whatsoever. He wasn't commiting a crime or going to commit a crime and there is nothing he could have done to prevent GZ from following him.
- 11,525
- 28
- Joined
- May 22, 2007
This wasnt about race....when GZ was recorded as referring to TM as a ****, derogatory term for Blacks?? And when you're used to hearing sectors talk about people of color, they refer to us as "them" which he did when he said "these ******** always get away"
The whole jury was 5 white broads and one Latina or Hispanic or whatever you want to call it. There was not a Black juror involved because the prosecution excused them.
Not about race? Ok.
If it isnt about race, go on Stormfront and see how those posters feel about this. If this wasnt about race, then TM wouldnt have been profiled. The basic idea GZ had was basically that because TM was Black he shouldn't have been out that night. Look at how the media was insinuating that Trayvon was a thug who smoked weed....while Zimmerman has been alleged to be (and had cases closed that proved he was) a violent, racist, raping scumbag who hides behind his father whenever things go down for him.
The whole jury was 5 white broads and one Latina or Hispanic or whatever you want to call it. There was not a Black juror involved because the prosecution excused them.
Not about race? Ok.
If it isnt about race, go on Stormfront and see how those posters feel about this. If this wasnt about race, then TM wouldnt have been profiled. The basic idea GZ had was basically that because TM was Black he shouldn't have been out that night. Look at how the media was insinuating that Trayvon was a thug who smoked weed....while Zimmerman has been alleged to be (and had cases closed that proved he was) a violent, racist, raping scumbag who hides behind his father whenever things go down for him.
- 9,025
- 8,118
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
The guy is obtuse.
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
because of course, the justice system did its job right? as it was intended to?
- 7,284
- 3,809
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2012
all i said was that he was a former judge. chill with the extremes.
a former judge with the right friends and/or connections in law enforcement whos son has already skated a felony in the past? why u guys think he was doing neighborhood watch in the first place.
da proof is in da pudding but ill stop and let u guys continue to get out your hate for white ppl. heres prob the safest place to do it. although u never know word to justin carter
ohmygosher
Banned
- 8,072
- 2,447
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
What are you referring to?
He WAS placed in police custody. They questioned him and couldn't charge him with anything, so by LAW they had to let him go.
You brought up bail. That comes into play AFTER you are charged. When he was charged, he posted bail and was released. This is ALL perfectly LEGAL.
- 9,251
- 3,596
- Joined
- May 28, 2013
- 9,025
- 8,118
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2013
I'm not watching all that but if she literally said all six jurors felt TM was a thug, then I stand corrected and the two of you are correct. I'll own up to that L.
Last edited:
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
i understand that it is legal. my gripe with the police, as you say they questioned him and couldnt charge him.
what i want to know is what did they ask him? what did they look for in investigating him that they really found no evidence? all this stuff has come out now, his myspace etc... where was this back then?
as far as him being charged and posting bail, why did it take so long? would it have happened without public outcry? would he post without public support?
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
i hear what you are saying and im not trying to say his father didnt have anything to do with it. i just dont feel as if it was singularly one man's actions that led to this, other than GZ's.
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
it was peaceful and all that, had a couple speakers then it turned into a freedom concert
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
thats like saying im not going to acknowlede your point.
- 25,614
- 22,578
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
you are blank blank blank - cause I don't want to get banned ..so you disagree, but you would vote the same say?
so either way, looking at the eivdence, or not looking at the evidence, GZ is not guilty.
if you don't understand what i wrote, there's no way I should continue entertaining your ***.
you are beyond trolling now!
ohmygosher
Banned
- 8,072
- 2,447
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2012
Why can't all of your replies be like this?
As far as not being able to charge him, without any witnesses, they could only go off of his word. That's not bad policing, that's bad luck. He told his side of the story, and without anyone to refute it, they had to let him walk.
The police didn't release his myspace. The MySpace page was found over a year ago, but the big time news networks didn't report it until a few days before the verdict to get people riled up.
He was charged because Angela Corey was pressed to do so even tho they had no case against him. They had absolutely no chance of winning this from the beginning.
As far as the last question, I don't understand how that is relevant or a problem.
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
you said you disagree with the verdict.
based on the evidence presented by the prosecution, you would vote the same verdict.
so the only way this could be if you looked at the evidence with the same bias they did.
- 25,614
- 22,578
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
These people can say - yes I believe her because she said it.
But yet they say, they can't believe GZ because he said it.
Aint there bias here?
Oh and she does have a reason to lie and create outrage. She was motivated by greed and a book deal.
So yes, I guess I have to believe what she said because she is the only speaking out about it. Just like I can't doubt what GZ said because I dont have anyone else to say other wise!
- 25,614
- 22,578
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
or I have a lot more to go by - like his bg etc etc etc ....
it's obvious that you can't comprehend ....
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
She is consistent, she said she wasnt looking at the evidence and her verdict supports that.
GZ is inconsistent. His actions are not compatible with what he would have you believe.
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
so including his background into it, he doesnt show a racist and violent past? or despite that, it still had no bearing n his mindset or actions that night?
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
i apologize i have a hard time writing long posts.
- 25,614
- 22,578
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2013
I'm not answering a person that can't comprehend and is just arguing for .... not even sure ...
not guilty
the way the presented the evidence and the way the prosecution went all in for murder and didn't live room for manslaughter. GZ is not guilty.
and this is where you argue that justice wasn't done and we all know he was racist and he is guilty ... maybe so - morally .... however, not legally at least not for murder.
if the prosecution would of have left room for manslaughter, or presented that aspect, then I could see the jurors voting guilty.
not guilty
the way the presented the evidence and the way the prosecution went all in for murder and didn't live room for manslaughter. GZ is not guilty.
and this is where you argue that justice wasn't done and we all know he was racist and he is guilty ... maybe so - morally .... however, not legally at least not for murder.
if the prosecution would of have left room for manslaughter, or presented that aspect, then I could see the jurors voting guilty.
- 18,115
- 11,769
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2013
im sorry if it seems pointless to you how this is an issue for me.
- 1,029
- 248
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2012
What do you mean "left room" for manslaughter.
He was charged with manslaughter the jury could have and should have convicted him with manslaughter.
The judge allowed it.
He was charged with manslaughter the jury could have and should have convicted him with manslaughter.
The judge allowed it.
- 1,029
- 248
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2012
There grounds to arrest him that very night.
He had priors and trayvon has no weapons there were indeed grounds to arrest him.
The police did not call anyone on trayvons phone to try and identify him, that police department messed up and that is why people were fired. Even the prosecution accused them of being sloppy.
He had priors and trayvon has no weapons there were indeed grounds to arrest him.
The police did not call anyone on trayvons phone to try and identify him, that police department messed up and that is why people were fired. Even the prosecution accused them of being sloppy.
