Rachel Jeantel Tells Piers She And Trayvon Feared Zimmerman Might Be Gay Rapist

Well it's the white mans fault that blacks are guy in the first place. http://youtu.be/YpcXnabzFFw

 

Oh...so NOW we know why Trayvon "went looking" for Zimmerman; he was "lookin' for love, in all the wrong places..."

 

"Legitimately raped"....?

 

I'm not gay but my boyfriend is and he says he has raped before.

 

May I ask...... Are you a guy or gal?

 

I said whooped, not rape.

 

No, because I don't like you.

- - - Updated - - -

You're not understanding me...it doesn't make me feel better no matter what you're calling it. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

Exactly, and I don't support the Crump/Sharpton side either. They're just as bad as Robert Zimmermen/O'Mara and how they're all trying to turn this tragedy into a business.

They're not my bretheren...but one thing I'm growing quite sick of is how both sides of this issue are now claiming vicitmhood.

I'm sick of victims. If your life sucks, change it. Mine was great between 1964 to 2000, then it sucked hard untill 2010, and I changed it. If you're being victimized by racists...go pick a fight with them, and when they start kicking your ass, shoot them.

If someone calls you a racist, stick your middle finger right up in their face, and don't act like some blue haired old church lady who's going to faint from shock.

I've had it with this sh*t!......if I have to hear Sharpton or Holder say one more word about how they have to give their sons special instructions for young black man survival...or listening to O'Mara or Robert Z talk about how properly Duh-E-George acted the night he shot Martin.......I'm going to puke on somebody's shoes.

 

Come to think about it, Zimmerman does have that Chunky Ted Bundy vibe to his demeanor.

 

I wonder where he's going to hide?......they raised enough money for him between the book sales and donations to set up all involved with a fat ranch in Argentina.

 

He can't hide in America that's for sure. Exile to Argentina is probably his best bet.

 

I do not disagree except for one aspect of your post. Your condemnation of Zimmerman and O'Mara.

Zimmerman's hope for a normal life is ruined. He can't just go and get a job anytime soon. And he likely owes $100's of thousands of dollars in legal fees yet. He can't even walk the streets because of what the liberals have done to him. So he needs to yell the truth for as long as he can, and earn money doing it. He will. He could get $1 million for his first big interview.

O'Mara's business is the Law. That is how he pays his bills. And the man is enormously intelligent and frank. Kudos to him for all the money he can make, and for ripping the racists on the Left a new ******** at every opportunity. He deserves every penny he can make doing these interviews. And his rates just went up too. ............

 

I wonder why the righties on this site aren't trying to portray those broken windows and vandalism in Oakland last weekend as "full scale riots"?...maybe they're still basking in the glow of what they think is their small victory. It has been a long time since righties had anything good to think about.

 

At what point did Tray Dogg stop what he was doing and beat feet for his house at warp speed? Oh that's right - he never feared anything enough to run home. He hid and pounced on George instead. I guess potheads really do make stupid decisions - I suspected they did. Now we know for sure. And parents - if your kids are potheads that can't stay in school, have thug gangsta gold teeth, and creep around neighborhoods on dark rainy nights with a screwdriver and a slim jim - please be a better parent and sign your kid into a drug rehab center somewhere.

 

LOL, whut?!?!?!

- - - Updated - - -

You know; when someone "wuz dressed like they wanted it".

 

I'm a guy. It's a joke. Sorry not a good one but still a joke

 

There isn't any reason why O'Mara, West, and Crump can't launch celebrity careers on talk shows and HLN, but to making money by fueling racial resentments after the killing of Martin shouldn't be supported.

Whether it's Crump or Sharpton, or Robert Zimmerman.

I see RZ going way past defending his brother and family...and evangelizing the righty cause. At first I found him articulate, but now he's beginning to sound like a Fox News parrott who loves the sound of his own voice.

 

O.Mara, and West, and even B. Zimmerman are pushing back against the absurdity of the Left. And they are doing it with the truth. They are not the ones fomenting a racial divide. The Left is doing it, just as they have always done.

If the Left keeps pushing with the absurdity, Obama will get the race war he so desperately seeks.

 

I'm not seeing it exactly that way...but when I watched juror # whatever last night on Anderson Cooper...it dawned on me there are two types of people in this whole Z VS M issue.

1. People who believe Z shot M because he was losing a fight, and the injuries he sustained didn't justify killing.

2. People who believe Z shot M because he was attacked without provocation, and needed to shoot M to save his own life.

I'm obviously a number 1, with a caveat...I respect the verdict, and I respect the court's handling of the case. Even though I think Z was culpable, that doesn't matter because the prosecution couldn't prove that, so it doesn't matter if I, or anyone else, thinks that.

That juror was also right IMO, that Z would have profiled anyone that fit the description of any races if the suspects fit that description of the previous suspects.....however......I find it extremely disturbing that she calls him "George", and talks just like all the people on this site who support Z. I suspect this juror was a Z supporter the whole time.

But!.....it was impossible to find an unbiased jury

 

Maybe after sitting through the entire trial and hearing the phrase "The defendent Mr Zimmerman" 4579 times she was bored and decided to break the mold. Could be that simple.
You find using someone's first name extremely disturbing? I find that somewhat disturbing. Now we're both disturbed. Cut it out.

 

He just wont go away and that bothers some huh?

 

You don't know me well enough for me to pay any attention to "cut it out"

But on my lunch break a few minutes ago, I saw that the other 5 jurors made a point of saying that the juror who is talking doesn't represent their views, and in a statement issued by all 5 of the other jurors, they said something to the effect they want the law changed, because the way it is now, is the reason they had to find him not guilty, and they aren't booking paid gigs like the one who talked.

 

Not sure who you are talking about..but I'd like to see Crump go away, and he can take Sharpton, O'Mara, West, and Robert Zimmerman with him

When are you people going to go back to bashing Obama for everything?....that was fun, and I miss those days...

......good times...good times.

 

You have cherry-picked two possible representations. I submit that neither is accurate to the circumstances, much less the Law.

First off, it is not about injuries sustained. This was testified to by several witnesses, including the Prosecution witness, the black Captain (name escapes me). You cannot wait until your injuries have you at death's doorstep. One punch, one slam, one kick, and you could be defenseless, if not permanently injured already. To think otherwise is just plain stupid.

The above is well documented. And as I have noted before, happened to my uncle. He was 6'2", 37 years old, robbed at gunpoint. He cooperated, but as a parting gift, got slammed upside his head with a 6-pac of Budweiser cans, held in someone's hand, as to be punched with the cans. Softer than concrete. Gave him a stroke. He never talked again without a slur. And never walked again either. For the remaining 39 years of his life.

So its not legitimate to think #1. Its not the Law. Its not reality. Its not common sense. It is an argument embraced by the racist hordes though. The Trayvonistas,

As for #2, its closer. But with or without "provocation" is not the standard. You cannot physically assault someone because they pissed you off. The "provocation" must fit the Law. And even then, you must stop the assault, even if legally provoked, if the other person is incapacitated, or motions to quit. Trayvon went way past this, as evidenced by Good's testimony. Trayvon had a duty to stop. Look it up ! The totality of the evidence against Trayvon is what convinced the jury.