Carrying a gun can make you see them.

[CaptGoodvibes]

Well, here is my answer

When did I say any of that? I never said any of that.

Fun to watch so many people say what they "think" happened and again you are saying, without any facts, that Zimmerman got off some felony charges BECAUSE of a family connection. Show me this? Show me where it says that he got off felony charges because of a family connection. If it is FACT then I am sure you will not have a hard time finding something that PROVES what you are saying.

I instructed you not to answer. I guess you can't follow orders either.

All joking aside, the facts are, people that have had prior encounters with Zim claim he was aggressive, confrontational, likely to snap because of his temper, and had reported him to the police for these things. He has a father that was a judge, a mother also under the court wing, and although he assaulted a cop, somehow was not charged or convicted of the felony that would have kept him from legally carrying the gun he used to murder the kid.

He stalked the kid and killed him under the guise of self-defense. Whether or not he is acquitted of murder, he did these things. These are all facts.

What he is saying in his own defense, without corroborating witnesses or physical evidence to back his story, are not facts.

This is the truth.

If you cannot acknowledge this, you are not worth engaging in further discussion. If you cannot see you are simply trolling with your incessant need to reply to each and every comment anyone had made in this thread, then I feel sorry for the people that rely on you to make rational decisions in day to day life.

Have a good day sir.

[Ezzzzy1]

I instructed you not to answer. I guess you can't follow orders either.

All joking aside, the facts are, people that have had prior encounters with Zim claim he was aggressive, confrontational, likely to snap because of his temper, and had reported him to the police for these things. He has a father that was a judge, a mother also under the court wing, and although he assaulted a cop, somehow was not charged or convicted of the felony that would have kept him from legally carrying the gun he used to murder the kid.

He stalked the kid and killed him under the guise of self-defense. Whether or not he is acquitted of murder, he did these things. These are all facts.

What he is saying in his own defense, without corroborating witnesses or physical evidence to back his story, are not facts.

This is the truth.

If you cannot acknowledge this, you are not worth engaging in further discussion. If you cannot see you are simply trolling with your incessant need to reply to each and every comment anyone had made in this thread, then I feel sorry for the people that rely on you to make rational decisions in day to day life.

Have a good day sir.

Thats fair to say... That because we disagree I am trolling and take it lower with your comment about the people that rely on me? Whatever dude.

I didnt listen to your "orders" and I am sorry, boss.

Sure there are facts that say he has had a run in or two but my point is that without knowing anything more than that you drew the conclusion that he got out of those situations because of a family connection. You can not prove that he got off because of a connection. One might see the line you are drawing but you are just speculating what happened.

What he is saying IS fact. You dont believe him but without a witness to say otherwise his statements are the only think you can go off of. It is not your place to say whether or not he was lying, you dont know.

[#1Townie]

And neither do you ej. So stop. You spin my head because you show no proof of your FACTS. you claim the other witness that claims Zimmerman pushed martin is lying. What he says is not fact. Its a story. One the cops didn't buy. Now they say they have evidence to go after murder. I guess that's all lies as well.

Round and round we go. Oh and btw. His comments about people that depend on you is far less then some of the comments you made back on page 2.

[Ezzzzy1]

And neither do you ej. So stop. You spin my head because you show no proof of your FACTS. you claim the other witness that claims Zimmerman pushed martin is lying. What he says is not fact. Its a story. One the cops didn't buy. Now they say they have evidence to go after murder. I guess that's all lies as well.

Round and round we go. Oh and btw. His comments about people that depend on you is far less then some of the comments you made back on page 2.

Dude, I was kidding about her lying (how would I know she was lying), hence the at the end of my "she was lying" comment. It was a taste of your own medicine. It just felt good to throw some worthless shit out there.

So if you were accused of something (anything) and the cops asked you what happened it would be your "story" the "facts"? Thats some shit right there.

I made 1 comment on page 2 townie and it wasnt pointed at anyone.

[#1Townie]

You have made many comments. Pointed at anyone that didn't agree with you. Yes I have been accused of things I didn't do. Did I like it? No. But Zimmerman did infact kill someone. That he did do. Now we will see what a jury says. Does it worry you that bad to be wrong? Its a trial. If he is innocent then he should be fine right? No? The whole system is going to frame him? That worked well with oj. How about that lady that the news reported killing her kids? Innocent. This may in fact be just like that. The outcome doesn't matter to me one way or the other. With to many conflicting reports a trial is the best way to get to the bottom of all the bs.

How can you so blindly follow a person? What he says is not facts. Im the greatest artist the universe has ever seen. That's now a fact because I said so? I killed 50 men. Now is that fact?

There must be other reasons that the cops wanted charges from the get go. There must some really good shit for this investigator to go with murder. Why not wait and see what comes from the court process before we cry about it.

[Ezzzzy1]

You have made many comments. Pointed at anyone that didn't agree with you.
*"Many" is an exaggeration. Sure things got heated a few times and thats the way it goes. Im not crying about it just saying that I have since then tried to keep it civil.

Yes I have been accused of things I didn't do. Did I like it? No. But Zimmerman did infact kill someone. That he did do.
*Sure so when you gave your account of what happened what would you call that? Your "story" or the "facts"? Thats my point.

Now we will see what a jury says. Does it worry you that bad to be wrong? Its a trial. If he is innocent then he should be fine right? No?
*The next step is for a judge to hear all the evidence and at that point they could throw the case out or proceed to trial. How could I be wrong? I havent said that I know what happened, I havent said what I think should happen. This whole time I have been arguing with people that ARE doing that.

The outcome doesn't matter to me one way or the other. With to many conflicting reports a trial is the best way to get to the bottom of all the bs.
*Then why even engage in a conversation about it? Especially if it just goes round and round.

How can you so blindly follow a person? What he says is not facts. Im the greatest artist the universe has ever seen. That's now a fact because I said so? I killed 50 men. Now is that fact?
*You actually make a vary good point here. Just because you said it doesnt make it "fact" in a situation like what you are saying. Why? Because you are lying. When someone makes an accurate statement, we call that a "fact" when someone says an inaccurate statement, we call that lying. You have no grounds to think that Zimmerman is lying other than you dont believe that anyone tells the truth. How fair is that?

There must be other reasons that the cops wanted charges from the get go. There must some really good shit for this investigator to go with murder. Why not wait and see what comes from the court process before we cry about it.
*And I guess we will.

[#1Townie]

God i hate how you reply. You make impossible to respond. A fact woukd be evidence. Like how the bullet traveled. A story would be Zimmerman's accounts. Another story would be from the girl that claims other events took place. This has been on the table the whole time. But we were not there so we didnt know shit.

[Ezzzzy1]

God i hate how you reply. You make impossible to respond. A fact woukd be evidence. Like how the bullet traveled. A story would be Zimmerman's accounts. Another story would be from the girl that claims other events took place. This has been on the table the whole time. But we were not there so we didnt know shit.

Sorry man, im just trying to address your points.

If they were to bring in a witness and the witness gave a statement, that statement would be considered a "fact". Im not an expert on this one but am having a hard time understanding, again, why you or anyone else is saying Zimmerman is lying and that what he is saying is not true.

In this type of a situation, because there is only one witness, that witnesses testimony is what is to be considered fact until proven wrong. Its not the other way around. There is almost no way to prove 90% of any of this since other peoples interactions were limited.

[#1Townie]

Go look for your own "facts".

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

[QUOTE=CaptGoodvibes;661139]All joking aside, the facts are, people that have had prior encounters with Zim claim he was aggressive, confrontational, likely to snap because of his temper, and had reported him to the police for these things. He has a father that was a judge, a mother also under the court wing, and although he assaulted a cop, somehow was not charged or convicted of the felony that would have kept him from legally carrying the gun he used to murder the kid.
Likely to snap? Pure conjecture. If the young adult (old enough to be tried as an adult) was indeed assaulting him like ALL the evidence so far supports, Martin was armed and dangerous (the ground, or a brick, or a rock are all deadly weapons) and Zim WAS legally carrying a weapon with which he lawfully defended himself.


He stalked the kid and killed him under the guise of self-defense. Whether or not he is acquitted of murder, he did these things. These are all facts.
He FOLLOWED the young adult Martin, then turned and went back to his truck. Martin then snuck up on him and assaulted him, and had him in an indefensible position. At that point, Martin was the felon. According to the one witness AND the EMT and police, these are the facts. And, in America, unless there are facts to the contrary (so far, NOT), these facts stand.


What he is saying in his own defense, without corroborating witnesses or physical evidence to back his story, are not facts.
They ARE the only facts unless proven otherwise. Zim does not NEED corroborating anything. In America, unless there are facts to the contrary (so far, NOT), and the prosecution, having the burden of proof to demonstrate that Zim was NOT fearing for his life at the moment the trigger was pulled (everything before and after is irrelevant), these facts stand. That is the ONLY truth.
QUOTE]