George Zimmerman charged with stalking man working on Trayvon

I do not believe that it was proved in court that Martin was the aggressor but if that is legal outcome so I will put that aside. Zimmerman was the adult in that situation. Albeit as you say an idiot adult. As a self appointed moron watchman wannabe cop he should have stayed in his vehicle and watched. If and when he observed something that required real police to investigate the idiot should have called the police while staying in his car.

You may be correct that neither one of them had played to specifically kill the other but Zimmerman was armed so logically that artificially boosted his bravado to confront potential targets.

Martin did indeed act like a teen in that he wanted to mouth off at some idiot who was watching him while Martin was legally walking to his father's house.

So yes they both to their own degree were idiots but Zimmerman dud not have to confront someone walking legally, not committing a crime, not pining any threat to property of persons.

Zimmerman the idiot adult should have been inside his truck and playing wannabe cop and fantasizing that he was Rambo of the Wannabees.

 

No because he followed another person in the dark first in his car and then on foot.. and failed to speak or identify himself.

 

Yes. I have read the law and its bad law.. I also lived in Florida for several years. There's lots of ne'er do wells.

 

Again. Which were not known until after a medical examination. All that was known for certain by George Zimmerman was that he was being assaulted, and his head was being slammed against the pavement. Such has resulted in the death of numerous other individuals.

Do note the emphasized portion. The severity of the injuries were not known at the time of the incident. George Zimmerman did not have the ability to accurately calculate the degree of injury that the back of his skull was being subjected to while his head was being slammed against the pavement. No individual would possess such analytical abilities.

 

Well that contains every EXCEPT a definition, but I'm not surprised.

Here is a simple and functional definition of the word: racism means considering one's own race to be superior to others, or considering other races to be somehow inferior to one's own.

 

The physical assault itself. He deliberately sought out confrontation.

And as has been noticed in recent weeks in the united states news media, normal behaviors are being reported to law enforcement as suspicious simply because a black individual is the one committing such. Black individuals have been reported as suspicious for swimming at a public pool during established business hours, delivering newspapers, delivering the mail, mowing laws, eating lunch in a school cafeteria where they are a student, and even being a firefighter.

 

How many of them attacked folks?

 

None of them .. nor did they stalk others or roam around at night with a loaded gun.

 

No kidding.. These news stories are bizarre .. and there has been a whole rash of them.

 

Which makes difference, and is of no relevance.

Or it may have provoked Trayvon Martin to commit violence regardless. There is no way of saying for certain, as the record of Trayvon Martin is less than stellar. He had already been suspended from school for numerous illegal altercations that involved violence against others.

 

At what distance did the supposed pursuit occur? What was the distance between them that legally constituted a pursuit?

 

Cite where such was demonstrated as actually being the facts.

 

What? I am not going to search thru 6 year old news bits. If you don't believe me, I don't care.

 

First, the fact that Trayvon Martin was a minor rather than an adult. Second, the messaging history on his phone demonstrates Trayvon Martin was engaged in a history of marijuana use, marijuana sale, and was looking into acquiring a handgun, all of which is illegal.

 

And yet it was demonstrated at the trial that he actually returned to the scene. Meaning he concluded that he was not going to return to the safety of his home, but instead would go and confront George Zimmerman, despite knowing he was not anywhere nearby.

 

Then perhaps such statements should not be made and asserted as being facts.

 

How come all of a sudden abuse of authority is a leftwing concept? Don't you Hicksville folk pack up ammo just to defend against your own government?

Do you agree, then, that fascism is a rightwinger's thing?

 

Would you favour a police state and a more authoritative government?

 

They are still factual.

 

Such is not relevant to the discussion at hand.

 

Even if it is factual, did the younger brother of Trayvon Martin lack the physical ability to unlock the door for his older brother and let him in? Or did the younger brother want him dead as well, and would have simply ignored the request? Was the younger brother asleep at the time and thus unable to respond to such a request being made?

The entire narrative has been that Trayvon Martin was simply being a good older brother, going out into the rain to get candy for his younger brother. If such is indeed the case, then it is very important to find out exactly why he did not have a key to the house, and why exactly such is relevant to the discussion.

 

I see that it isn't convenient, much more than being irrelevant.

Some who defend Martin may be BLM activists, yeah, but many of them are rather worried about the rising level of authoritative excesses that happens pretty much everywhere in the Occidental world. So now an authority representative can show up at your door by mistake and kill you just because he didn't felt quite safe. And it's okay - you (in the general sense) accepted it.

I don't see this sad chapter of the US court system as a racial affair, althought many will. I see it as just another step toward government excess and a more fascist society - and, must I remember you, the libertarian-authoritative axis is independant from the left-right one.

I think you guys just can't see the forest for the trees. In the coming years, we are going to lose a lot more liberties - you can quote me on this.

Okay, sorry for the interlude - you can go back to bashing the left now.

 

How is any of the above relevant to the rehash of the discussion that was had six years ago, about what incidents occurred on the night in question?

 

Who said he was walking?

 

Actually that is the stupid **** you are doing, you claim that Trayvon initiated the situation that occurred that night. We know for a fact that coward ass Zimmerman initiated the situation that night, it is not even debatable.

You claim that Trayvon initiated the physical contact, there is nothing to prove that other than Zimmerman's version of events.

See this is the type of stupid ass **** folks post when they have nothing left.

That's a good question, why didn't has pants have any grass stains at the knees did he grass and waterproof his pants as well.

So just say you don't know instead of trying to answer a question with a question.

The dude didn't even have a band-aid and yet he claims he was on the brink of death. He had no concussions, didn't lost consciousness, waited until the next morning to go to his personal doctor and all he prescribed was aspirin and take it easy for a couple of days.

Post a picture of the t-shirt he was wearing underneath and let's see what type of stains are on it.

Again here are the dumb questions that are asked when you can't answer questions. Why didn't Zimmerman go back to his truck after the dispatcher told that coward they didn't need him to follow Trayvon. He was the NW Captain and are you telling me he didn't know the name of all 3 streets that were in their little sub division. Why did he find a teenager walking home talking on a cellphone "suspicious"? Why did he claim that Trayvon wearing a hooded was "suspicious" when it was freaking raining.