Replies

Thanks for the link.

There are a number of plausible theories about what happened, but they are just that - theories.

Did GZ approach TM or just 'bump into him' and then show or even reach for his weapon? If he did then TM would have been 100% within his rights under SYG to fight to keep GZ from pulling the gun or the trigger.

There is nothing that proves this but, as some folks here are fond of saying, there is nothing that dis-proves it either. It is just one of many equally plausible scenarios.

I do not think that Zimmerman is any kind of hero or good guy in this. I think he's just a guy who got in over his head and had to shoot his way out.

I don't think that he will go to jail and I don't think that he should have been indicted. But that is because there is a lack of evidence of guilt - not a plethora of evidence of innocence.

I don't care one bit about TM's facebook page or twitter account. I can show you FB pages of rich Jewish or Catholic School kids from LI's Gold Coast that look more gangsta. It's 16/17 yo macho posturing.

And, I don't care one bit about GZ's prior brushes with the law, they were a few years ago and young men grow up.

All that matters is who started this fight...and, in spite of the legions of freepers who claim otherwise, only two people know the answer...the guy who died and the guy who killed him.

Again, thanks for the link.

All that matters is who started this fight...and, in spite of the legions of freepers who claim otherwise, only two people know the answer...the guy who died and the guy who killed him.

That is right. So far, that is the only evidence in front of the public - Zimmerman’s account of what happened. They can’t let Trayvon’s chest beating mother “testify” differently. She was not there. Al Sharpton was not there and neither was NBC. The prosecutor at the time, decided Zimmerman’s statement on the event matched the evidence collected by police at the scene and in the 911 call and there was no contrary evidence to prosecute.

Seems like freepers are going by what evidence they have seen so far versus flapping lips of race baitors who are looking for a good lynching.

If you have special evidence showing Zimmerman started the fight and is a liar, let us bad freepers in on it. The judge and jury has to look at the evidence and can’t go on how they feel it might have gone down based on the charged statements and manipulations of the press and race baitors.

When the prosecution submits her evidence against Zimmerman, then we can debate the validity that. But currently, I have seen nothing.

All that matters is who started this fight...and, in spite of the legions of freepers who claim otherwise, only two people know the answer...the guy who died and the guy who killed him.

That is right. So far, that is the only evidence in front of the public - Zimmerman’s account of what happened. They can’t let Trayvon’s chest beating mother “testify” differently. She was not there. Al Sharpton was not there and neither was NBC. The prosecutor at the time, decided Zimmerman’s statement on the event matched the evidence collected by police at the scene and in the 911 call and there was no contrary evidence to prosecute.

Seems like freepers are going by what evidence they have seen so far versus flapping lips of race baitors who are looking for a good lynching.

If you have special evidence showing Zimmerman started the fight and is a liar, let us bad freepers in on it. The judge and jury has to look at the evidence and can’t go on how they feel it might have gone down based on the charged statements and manipulations of the press and race baitors.

When the prosecution submits her evidence against Zimmerman, then we can debate the validity that. But currently, I have seen nothing.

>>All that matters is who started this fight...and, in spite of the legions of freepers who claim otherwise, only two people know the answer...the guy who died and the guy who killed him.<<

For my money the most damning thing against Trayvon was the ABC interview of his friend DeeDee. As I recall, she said that Trayvon said something to the effect: “Why are you following me?” To which George said: “Why are you here?” Then she heard no more conversation and the phone went dead.

It doesn't pass the smell test for me to think that George would have slugged Trayvon. It seems much more plausible that Trayvon would have responded to George's question by punching him.

Also, remember that the original investigators did not find discrepancies between what George said happened and the physical evidence and the earwitnesses. George didn't know what the evidence would find or the witnesses would have heard when he talked to the police, so he would have been on shaky ground if he had started to make things up that could have been disproven.

Also remember that there doesn't seem to be any evidence of George confronting suspicious people before and he did call the cops. If he was planning on doing something illegal, it seems odd that he would have called the cops.