MSNBC's Melissa Harris-Perry Hopes Trayvon Martin 'Whooped The S*** Out Of Zimmerman

His actions and demeanor were perfectly rational that night so why would you want someone to assault him and threaten him with serious bodily harm. If I am on my front porch and someone looking suspicious walks by and I watch them I deserve to be assaulted and threatened?

 

Geez....I must have it all wrong....I thought trayvon was the one that got hisself killed....I though a jury listened to all the evidence.....and exonerated George....am i wrong?

 

Just saying this could have gone either way depending on who was the last man left standing. Not arguing anything else. We will never know for sure.

 

Again that wasn't what happened either.

 

Shows her stupidity. Fighting is just what might have caused his death. As a matter of fact, I think that is just what was pointed out to the jury and how so many people, even people without weapons get killed by police. If Black leaders want to really help Blacks, they would stress on them, don't resist. You have plenty of time to defend yourself later.

 

Just kill everyone you think is a bad guy. You better hope no one thinks you are bad guy though as you walk down a street. Turnabout is fair play in Dodge City it seems.

 

The distinction being what exactly. Zimmerman was watching Martin, that is all. Martin ran off losing Zimmerman. The dispatcher for the fourth time asked Zimmerman to let them know what he did and more specifically where he ran off. Zimmerman exited his car to see which way Martin ran off. Martin who was back at the apartment saw Zimmerman crossing the T junction.

What gave Martin the right to go back and assault Zimmerman?

Again if I am sitting on my front porch and see someone walking by who looks suspicious and I watch them, even going to the curb to see which way they turn, what right does that person have to come back and assault me?

 

laughable that people still think Trayvon verdict was wrong and have all the answers that the state of Florida couldn't prove, and Eric Holder himself couldn't prove. Yet, bloggers on the inet have it all figured out.

 

Why the hyperbole?

How about just kill everyone who is assaulting me and threatening me with serious bodily harm or death? You OK with that?

How about I don't assault and threaten someone with serious bodily harm or death so I don't have to worry about it? You OK with that?

And what was turnabout here?

- - - Updated - - -

And another lie of omission.

Tell me something if you believe that accurately and completely describes the events of that night, why didn't Zimmerman just shoot Martin instead of calling the police, telling them who he was, where he lived, giving them his cell phone number, a description of the guy he was about to kill and then wait for the police to be arriving any second to pull the trigger? Why didn't he just shoot him from the car when he first saw him and then hightail it out in his car?

 

Like I said, if you don't like the possibility of aggressive tactics being used upon your own person, don't support it when it is done to someone else. If you think getting punched is reason to kill, tell your teen age son to carry a gun to high school and kill the first jock that kicks his arse in the locker room. Explain it this way; walk through the locker room with a pink skirt on when the football team is done with practice. Skip through their locker room singing Bette Midler tunes. Make sure they get the impression that you are gay. Keep your weapon inside your garter belt because as soon as the first jock knocks you silly, shoot him dead to rights. I wished I had done that when I was a kid, they used to beat me up all the time son. Should be a wonderful example of parenting...

 

The dispatcher told him to stand down, and not to follow him but to keep a watchful eye.

You know what you believe because Zimmerman lived to tell his tale. I'm not arguing the specifics of this case the way they have been presented, only that if TM had , had the gun or a gun, according to the law, either could have said they were afraid for their lives, and if they were the only one left standing, it could have gone either way.

If I was in my own neighborhood and somebody was following me first in a vehicle and then on foot, I would be concerned about his motives. Unlike TM I would have hid in a dark spot, tried to get a license number and then done exactly what Zimmerman did at first. Contact 911 and report a suspicious person in the area possibly casing it out or looking for an easy target to mug. Not knowing any different, my suspicions would have been justified by Zimmerman's actions.

Unless you are claiming TM had no right to be in the neighborhood he lives in, he wasn't doing anything wrong until he tried to confront Zimmerman on his own, and we know how that turned out. But like I said the law says he had the right to confront him and did not have to retreat. As dumb as it might have been not too.

 

AHHHH so if I happen to see them later walking in the opposite direction then I can run back and pull my gun and shoot them because I'm scared?

No he ran the shortest route home which took him between the buildings and a few minutes later saw Zimmerman walking past the T junction in the opposite direction. That is when he ran back to the T junction, not the moves of someone trying to hide. If he wanted to hide he could have gone into the apartment and locked the door and called the police or his father, instead he kept talking to the girl friend.

You are correct, he had done nothing wrong except for a little intimidation act before he ran off.

What did he do wrong after the he was ASKED, again you prove you didn't watch the trial, not to follow the suspicious person?

Of course you don't Martin could have walked away but he choose to run making himself look even more suspicious.

No the evidence didn't support that scenario. First Zimmerman didn't follow him in the car he was just sitting in the car. Second Martin didn't immediately run off he pranced around and tried to act tough. He never told the girl friend he was scared. He ran off losing Zimmerman and got back to the apartment to any safety he might have sought. Zimmerman didn't come in his direction he crossed the T going off in the opposite direction.

At no time was their a reasonable fear for his life or imminent serious bodily harm. It was only after Martin returned to the T junction from being two buildings down that the second encounter took place, not the actions of someone in fear of imminent death of serious bodily harm.

Let's not forget Zimmerman had been on the phone with the police, giving his name and address to them, urging them to get to the scene quickly, setting up a meeting place, knowing the would be arriving any nano-second and in fact he could have even been in their sights at that point, and you claim he just decided to shoot Martin? Even pulling his gun on him would have been a crime. Any attempt to detain him would have been a crime and had he simply done those things HE would have been carted off to jail that night.

So let's deal with the facts and the reality not your made up scenarios such as Martin had a gun or Zimmerman threatened him or attacked him when there is no evidence to support it.

 

No he didn't, your are factually incorrect but do prove what you are saying, post the transcript where the dispatcher tells him do stand down. The fact is Zimmerman at that point had no idea where Martin was as Martin had run off several minutes earlier. When the dispatcher suggested he not follow Martin he couldn't have at that point and Zimmerman merely turned and headed back towards his truck to meet up with the arriving any nano-second police.

I believe what the evidence presents and what anyone with a rational mind would see in it.

OK, it still does not give you license to assault them and threaten them with serious bodily harm. And Martin did not see Zimmerman follow him, he saw him minutes later two buildings up crossing the T junction and had I acted as Martin did I wouldn't be surprised to see and adult looking to see what I was up to. Be that as it may, he simply could have gone into the apartment and be alive today.

Unlike being the key word here. Had you done like Martin actually did you would likely be dead too.

Where would you get that idea?

Correct and then assaulted him.

Yes he go himself killed for threatening someone with imminent serious bodily harm or death.

Retreat from what?

 

Again the lies of omission.

What have I done to have someone use "aggressive" tactics against me.

How about if you don't like people defending themselves against imminent serious bodily harm or even death then when someone does don't try to defend yourself just let them kill you.

And again hyperbole does not change the facts or evidence or the reality of what happened that night.

 

Try and stay with me.

Actual transcript of 911 call;

Sounds pretty clear they didn't want him following TM and George didn't just respond he acknowledged their request.

If Zimmerman had died that night, most of the so-called facts, based on 'his' story would have not been known, and if the story TM told even reasonably went along with the physical evidence, it would be his story that would have resembled the facts. If he said he was confronted by Zimmerman, and he (Zimmerman) said he didn't tell him who or why he was following him, and a fight ensued, what evidence would you be using to prove he was lying?

He (TM) obviously wasn't scared of him or he wouldn't have confronted him, and once the fighting started, he could have said at that point he was scared. Remember you are speaking with the benefit of hindsight, I'm saying that none of what Zimmerman claimed to happen once he hung up with the dispatcher would be known. AND if the police showed up and TM felt justified his story would have been just as feasible since he and Zimmerman are the only one's who know exactly what happened.

The court said Zimmerman was in the right. I am not contesting that, I am only suggesting if TM had been the victor, and Zimmerman lay dying that night, doubt TM would have said I saw him and new I had to kill him. He would have said anything he could have to make it look like he had no choice. I'm just saying it would have been interesting to see how it would have gone the other way.

 

Oh believe me I am out in front of you on this one.

I know what was said and you were factually incorrect and had you watched the trial where it was gone over in detail you would have known that. The dispatcher CANNOT tell the person what to do, cannot order them to do anything and your attempts to portray it as Zimmerman did something wrong or violated a police order are fallacious.

Yes he did respond to the request, he didn't even know where Martin had run off to and after he was told that suggestion he had further discussion with the dispatcher as to where he would meet up with the police and he turned to walk back to his truck STILL having no idea where Martin was.

Martin would have been arrested, since he was on top of Zimmerman beating him towards serious bodily injury or even perhaps death and was seen doing so by witnesses. The transcript of the police call would have been introduced as evidence proving that Martin had run off and Zimmerman was not chasing him and did not know where he was and in fact was expecting the police to arrive at any second. Martin having no sign of injury, having run off to safety before the second encounter, having called Zimmerman a cracker, would have been hard pressed to prove he had not murdered Zimmerman.

His returning to confront Zimmerman, his behavior as related by Zimmerman to the dispatcher, the statements of the girl friend to investigators, the witness how came down and yelled for him to stop the beating but his continuance all would have led up to a manslaughter at the least.

I am speaking with the benefit of the facts and the evidence and not having to engage in made up nonsense as you insist upon using.

It would have been nothing of the sort and unbelievable by a jury.

Why did he have to kill him? There was no evidence supporting a claim Zimmerman was out to injury at all let alone kill him and the assertion he was flies in the fact of Zimmerman's actions and words that night.

Zimmerman had every reason to be thankful Martin had showed up as now the arriving any nano-second police could make sure he was not engaged in a possible crime, why would he kill him on the spot so he could be arrested 30 seconds later?

 

shhhh, facts are not to be used about the Zimmerman incident.... made up scenarios must be accepted as fact to justify the racebaiting.

 

Your wasting your time Joe, in their eyes Zimmerman had ever right to do exactly what he did and Trayvon only had a right to carry his ass in the house because he didn't belong there in the first place.

 

If Trayvon was really doing nothing.... he had nothing to worry about.

 

The police acknowledged he wasn't doing nothing or is that the only part of the police report that is a lie.

 

Good lord you are pathetic.

No I didn't watch the trial, nor did I care too.

In the state of Florida, if you fail to follow the instruction of a state official/employee that is involved in the act of public safety, you are breaking the law. Even a guy with a flag on the roadway directing traffic has the authority to instruct citizens what to do while doing their job, and you are going to claim that the court said that a 911 dispatcher doesn't have that same authority? If the court refused to accept the law in place then I would just say that is Florida for you.

Again I am not arguing anything about the case only that the way the law is written either one of these two individuals could have said they were in fear of their lives at one point or another. Whether it worked is another matter all together. Have fun arguing for the sake of arguing, just do it with somebody else.

 

Unbelievable isn't it, after the investigation the criminal and the civil investigation they still can't accept they lost on the merits, it's all what-if's and maybe's.

 

To begin with since you did not watch the trial nor the evidence presented you are not qualified to discuss this subject.

Also you are absolutely wrong regarding the legal authority of the dispatcher to order Z around.....the dispatcher under law can only make suggestions....which she did...she told Z....in these exact woids "We do not need you to do that" meaning they did not need Z to follow trayvon....she issued no order telling Z not to follow trayvon....nor did she have legal authority to order Z to do anything>>>>>got dat?

http://www.azcriminallawsexcrimes.c...eorge-zimmerman-not-to-follow-trayvon-martin/

 

Still trying to muddy the waters?


hahahhaahahah Obviously.....I love this stuff though...I could skewer liberals on this Zimmerman case forever....it is so easy and it makes them look so bad. The funny thing is somehow they seem not to get just how foolish it makes them look...and is ever so devastating to the liberal narrative they all cling to despite all truth, logic, facts, court testimony and just plain common sense.


Zimmerman was perfectly within the law as well as trayvonista was ----until he punched and pounced on George.....simple stuff.

Next! hehheh --- I will be waiting with bated breath....not!!!

 

You been watching too many westerns......obviously. bwaaaaaaaaaaaaa Actually that movie playing in your head does not even rise to the level of a b grade western.