Witness testifies Trayvon was a racist

If you're walking in a neighbor's yard peering into their windows on a cold, rainy, winter's night, you damn well be ready to be fucked with, daydreamer, and you better be faster on the draw, asshole.


+1 Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Every hand a winner and every hand a loser, the choice is yours,

martin was under no obligation to go home,

Correct. No laws were broken until the physical assault.

so if TM was circling his truck GZ couldn't have spoke to him from his truck and say to TM who he was and he was neighborhood watch.

GZ was not required to interact with TM. It seems he was trying to watch him from a distance, and let the police talk to him.

So if you come into my neighborhood visiting friends you're not allow to take a walk around unless your going directly from point A to B,

You can walk in any public space, but you may still draw the attention of those that do not recognize you.

since I don't know you would you mind if I followed you,

It's public space, you can walk were you please.

hey it dark out and raining too, you don't mind me walking behind you, hell it's legal,

It's public space, you can walk were you please.

I'll be two step behind you, it's legal, and no i'm not going to tell you why i'm following you around,

This were you start to become extreme.
You still have not broken any laws, but I may call the police if I feel threatened.

now what would be going through your mind,

I've called the police by this point, and I will be staying put until they show up.

what do you think my intentions are.

I will let the police figure it out.

hey you're a little scare now and you start running,

I am still waiting for the cops.

and I give chase, would your heart start pounding in fear yet.

I am still waiting for the cops

See you never looked at it from the person being followed, if you were following me and started chasing behind me,

There is a huge difference in following from a distance, and chasing someone two step behind them.

you better hope I don't have my weapon on me, cause you're going to be draw down on, so you better start talking fast or back the fuck up. i'll take my chance with the courts,

Unless you can show a credible threat, you may find yourself in trouble. If the person following you has not committed any crimes, you will have a hard time explaining why you brandished your weapon. Originally Posted by dreamvacationdates

No laws were broken until the physical assault.

No laws were broken until the physical assault.

No laws were broken until the physical assault.

Get it?

The jury believed that GZ responded to the physical assault in a lawful manner.

Just because you can beat someone's ass, doesn't mean you won't catch a bullet for your efforts.

Every hand a winner and every hand a loser, the choice is yours, Originally Posted by dreamvacationdates

Martin displayed the same behavior you advocate, daydreamer. Martin died. Martin lost! Take heed.

So it's OK to pull a weapon and shoot someone for following you because you're scared but not for GZ to shoot TM when he was getting his ass beat and his head pounded into the sidewalk? Originally Posted by Budman

I never said it wasn't ok for GZ to shoot TM, please keep up.

No laws were broken until the physical assault.

No laws were broken until the physical assault.

No laws were broken until the physical assault.

Get it?

The jury believed that GZ responded to the physical assault in a lawful manner.

Just because you can beat someone's ass, doesn't mean you won't catch a bullet for your efforts. Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

I'm in my neighborhood, the police know me by name, they live in my neighborhood too, I have a license and permit to carry, you looked shady wandering around in the dark, there is no distance requirement so I can follow you as close as I want as long as I don't touch you or threaten you.
now me being followed, I can most certainly ask you why you are following me, I don't have to wait to let you attack me before I draw my weapon. didn't say I would shoot unless you didn't identify yourself and didn't back off me, then, I feared for my life officer, that why I shot him, he reached in his coat and I saw something that looked like a gun, I'll take my chances with the court. when seconds count the police are minutes away.
you fellow can keep on hashing this out, but if someone fucks with me, better come correct.
later bitches

No laws were broken until the physical assault.

No laws were broken until the physical assault.

No laws were broken until the physical assault.

Get it?

The jury believed that GZ responded to the physical assault in a lawful manner.

Just because you can beat someone's ass, doesn't mean you won't catch a bullet for your efforts. Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

There was not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman just like there was not enough evidence to convict OJ or Casey Anthony in each respective jury's mind.

We will never know what really happened in any of these cases.

Did OJ really kill Nichole? A jury said there was not enough evidence to convict, just like in this case.

That is the system we have and I respect it but let's not read more into it than there really is. The fact is, you nor I will never know what happened that night. Were Martin your son, my guess is you might feel different about the outcome of this trial.

Were Martin your son, my guess is you might feel different about the outcome of this trial. Originally Posted by WTF

Maybe that's why they don't put family members on the jury... ya think?

Had Zimmerman gotten manslaughter...I doubt that the verdict would have been reversed. Originally Posted by WTF

You need to get a refund on your Internet JD GED.

Maybe that's why they don't put family members on the jury... ya think? Originally Posted by texasjohn1965

As usual, you missed the point.

You need to get a refund on your Internet JD GED. Originally Posted by gnadfly

When the SC decides a case 5-4, do the losing jurist lose their license?

Is that point going to be lost on you? My bet is yes ...

HAS THIS TURNED INTO ANOTHER BENGHAZI THREAD?

As usual, you missed the point.

When the SC decides a case 5-4, do the losing jurist lose their license?

Is that point going to be lost on you? My bet is yes ... Originally Posted by WTF

No, its not lost. It reinforces my point that you are a dumbshit.

You are going full "JoePa" again!

No, its not lost. It reinforces my point that you are a dumbshit.

You are going full "JoePa" again! Originally Posted by gnadfly

Zimmerman is the creepy Jerry Sandusky type. No wonder you like him!

I do not understand you social conservatives, you wanted to blame JoePa for Sandusky's actions and now Martin was all at fault for this tragedy.

I fail to see how this entire rigmarole is a "Political" discussion.

We will never know now will we? Originally Posted by WTF

Not absolutely. But if the DOJ or the Martins waste their time (and a lot of other people's time) with "followup" lawsuits we may have some valid decisions with which to draw some reasonable presumptions, along with the existing Florida case law to support those appropriate presumptions.

We got a saying around here,
You don't fuck with me
I don't fuck with you
But if you fuck with me
I'm going to hurt you.... bad.

difference would be I would be carrying, I wouldn't of run and I would of shot GZ right after I told him to back the fuck up and and identify himself, if he made another step in my direction, wouldn't been a fight fucking with me and the people I know all your legal posturing would of got you dead. i'm not violent, but i'm not taking any chances with anybody. Originally Posted by dreamvacationdates

That is good.

Because you would be able to take care of yourself while serving your life sentence.

Mr. "I'm-a-bad-ass"!

Because "around here" following, failing to identify, and stepping toward someone without a "deadly weapon" are NOT factual events that support the use of deadly force in defense of oneself.