No problem. We agree on that. You said I was wrong when I said the verdict did NOT mean he was proven to act in self-defense. That's not correct. That's all I was saying.

OK I smell what your cooking, should have taken my time. The more we post back and forth the more we seem to agree, I was in a contentious conversation with some one else and got too fired up on this one.:lol2:

OK I smell what your cooking, should have taken my time. The more we post back and forth the more we seem to agree, I was in a contentious conversation with some one else and got too fired up on this one.:lol2:

 

I ain't mad, bro.

As I've said I think the jury got it right. However, let's be clear. The jury simply said there's not enough evidence to show that GZ acted with "ill will" or "hatred." The verdict does not say he clearly acted in self-defense. If you believe it did then you also believe that OJ didn't have anything to do with two deaths in 1994.

I am not the one who assumed that Zimmerman lied about Martin's behavior, when other parts of his story were supported by eyewitness testimony and physical evidence. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Martin was simply walking on the sidewalk minding his own business and Zimmerman called the dispatcher and lied. None.

I There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Martin was simply walking on the sidewalk minding his own business and Zimmerman called the dispatcher and lied. None.

 

..and none to suggest he wasn't - other than from the guy who initiated it. I could be wrong.

 

Unless you look like you're on an acid trip how exactly do you look like you're on drugs from a distance? His vague generalities reeked of convenience to me.

I am not the one who assumed that Zimmerman lied about Martin's behavior, when other parts of his story were supported by eyewitness testimony and physical evidence. .

 

 

Didn't GZ say that "right after he hung the phone with the 911 dispatcher" that Trayvon approached him when phone records showed he was still on the phone with the girl for 2 more minutes? Didn't he tell the police he "was afraid Trayvon was GOING TO GO for the gun" and then tell someone else that TM DID GO for the gun? GZ said he had never heard of SYG before the shooting yet someone testified he took a class on the subject?

 

Too many inconsistencies to imply he didn't ever tell anything that wasn't true.

Just Google "zimmerman considers himself hispanic" and take your pick of sources. There will be a long list of results to answer your question.

The burden of proof is on those that make the claim. Assuming he has made such claims, I wonder why he denies his father's heritage?

I'm white and read it, but guess what, I wasn't born in the 60s, so I have no clue about what it was like and neither do a lot of other blacks who are wanting to cause problems. It is an excuse to riot and blame race.

It's not even news if GZ killed a white guy and not news if Obama don't open his mouth.

If TM had ran and not tried to be Billy Bad, he would be alive.

 

Are you kidding me????? TM was not a runaway slave. Why should he have ran away? He had every right to be where he was and to not be followed/profiled by a wanna be cop. IMO GZ is the one trying to play Billy Bad and ended getting his tail beat which gave him a reason to use his firearm.

The burden of proof is on those that make the claim. Assuming he has made such claims, I wonder why he denies his father's heritage?

Why does the President deny his mothers? Make about as much sense.

Are you kidding me????? TM was not a runaway slave. Why should he have ran away? He had every right to be where he was and to not be followed/profiled by a wanna be cop. IMO GZ is the one trying to play Billy Bad and ended getting his tail beat which gave him a reason to use his firearm.

 

So you basically just saw news highlights and didn't get to see actual testimony and evidence from the trial? He didn't have to run away your right he could have just kept on walking home. At one point they were walking away from each other, then for some reason TM decided to go find GZ and confront him.

The burden of proof is on those that make the claim. Assuming he has made such claims, I wonder why he denies his father's heritage?

I don't understand why anybody has to claim a race or ethnicity in a free country. Zimmerman is a man who should never have been charged with a crime, regardless of his race. Had both men been black, we would never have heard about the shooting and it is very unlikely Zimmerman would have been charged. He was charged because the media immediately began portraying him as a white man and juxtaposed his old mug shot against a photo of a 12 or 13 year old Trayvon Martin. The fix was in and it did not stick. Now NBC will be paying big bucks for editing the transcript of Zimmerman's call to the police that night to make him sound like a racist.

Didn't GZ say that "right after he hung the phone with the 911 dispatcher" that Trayvon approached him when phone records showed he was still on the phone with the girl for 2 more minutes? Didn't he tell the police he "was afraid Trayvon was GOING TO GO for the gun" and then tell someone else that TM DID GO for the gun? GZ said he had never heard of SYG before the shooting yet someone testified he took a class on the subject?

 

Too many inconsistencies to imply he didn't ever tell anything that wasn't true.

Are you asserting that those statements were made and are a part of the trial record, or are you asking me because you are not sure? If you are stating them as facts, then maybe you should document them yourself. If not, then I suggest you research them and then make your case. It is a little late for me to do your research for you.

 

AFAIK, there were no witnesses who testified that Martin was walking on the sidewalk, where he would have been expected to have been. Zimmerman's testimony on that point was not challenged, yet you assume that he was not being truthful - despite the fact that he voluntarily submitted to a voice stress analysis test that night and his statement was deemed to be true by the examiner. I don't think that there is any factual basis for your speculation. However, I respect your right to your opinion, whether or not it can be supported with evidence.

A million debates later and he's still not guilty.

I find it very interesting how some facts in the case are ignored and instead falsehoods seem to be the way to go. For instance, many people on here and the media have stated how Zimmerman was ordered not to follow Trayvon when he was talking to the 911 dispatcher, this is false. He was never told not to follow Trayvon, yet many seem to be claiming that he was ordered not to follow.

 

Emergency operator Sean Noffke, who answered Zimmerman's 911 call reporting the first sight of Martin, was among the witnesses as the prosecution set the scene on the night of Feb. 26, 2012. Zimmerman said he saw a youth, later identified as Martin, who looked suspicious.

The pair had a confrontation that left Martin dead, shot by Zimmerman, who said he acted in self-defense after Martin attacked him.

PHOTOS: The controversial case in pictures

The Martin family and their supporters have argued that Noffke ordered Zimmerman to stay away from Martin, though the defense has maintained the comments were not a direct order.

In his testimony, Noffke said he didn’t order Zimmerman to stop. Dispatchers don’t issue such orders because of liability issues, he said.

Noffke, a 911 operator at the Seminole County Sheriff’s office, said Zimmerman had spotted Martin walking in the dark and reported him as looking “like he’s up to no good.”

Prosecutor Richard Mantei focused on the words used in that call, particularly when Noffke asked Zimmerman if he was following Martin. “Why did you ask … 'Are you following him?'” the prosecutor asked Noffke.

“It sounded like movement and wind coming through the phone, after [Zimmerman] stated the subject was running,” Noffke said.

“How come you didn’t … say ‘don’t follow'?” the prosecutor asked him.

Noffke explained that for legal reasons, 911 operators may not give such orders. “We’re directly liable if we give a direct order,” he said. “We always try to give general basic … not commands, just suggestions.”

GZ really had no basis to call the police. His reasoning was nebulous. That is what started this whole situation. No basis existed.

 

Sure he did. We get calls like that all the time.

 

The area had a rash of burglaries, there was a subject walking around at night in the rain that met the description of burlgary suspects. There is no harm at all in calling in suspicious activity.

 

You'd be amazed at the types of calls 911 operators get. This was definitely not out of the norm or unwarranted.

 

Now don't get me wrong, do I think Trayvon should of been killed? Heck no, it's a travesty the event ended the way it did. But to say he shouldn't of called the police when he was suspicious of a person in the area where burglaries were taking place is wrong wrong wrong.

Unless you are black you will never understand. But regardless, in your mind you truly believe Zimmerman isn't guilty of anything? The case may not be as cut and dry as I "made it" but morally it is. At the end of the day if Zimmerman truly felt threatened he could have drove off and waited for the police but instead he wanted to be a vigilante and now an innocent child no longer walks the earth. A question for you: if the roles were absolutely reversed, honestly how would you feel and would the black shooter be arrested?

http://www.chicagonewsreport.com/2012/04/daniel-adkins-killer-claims-self.html

 

Thought you'd be interested in this...kind of spoils your assumption that if roles were reversed the black man would be arrested.

 

Black man kills white man in AZ and escapes arrests after claiming self defense.