Pictures of Zimmerman's bloody head.

[tonymctones]

I leave it out because there is no proof

Zimmerman could have assaulted Martin and scraped his head in the process

I haven't seen any proof of that his head was bashed into the concrete one time, much less for a minute as he claims

I don't see any proof, at this point, for the need of deadly force

I think Zimmerman fucked up and killed this guy unnecessarily and without a justifiable cause

I'm aware that is solely my  opinion and I'm open to new information

The fact that an eye witness saw trayvon fighting with him, on top of him lends credibility to his story.

Again you have absolutely nothing to back up your story, just opinion based on opinion.

why do you take the other self defense story at face value then?

I think they guy was taunting him, telling him that he has just got back from plowing his wife. When the guy said stop and moved to shake hands and ask for a truce the guy shot him in the head.

I have no proof of any of this, it is just my opinion...

[The Showstoppa]

Zimmerman will walk.

[240 is Back]

Especially when the defendant has some evidence to corroborate his story

ZImmerman has ZERO evidence to corroborate trayvon started the fight.

There's plenty of evidence he was LOSING the fight and screaming for help.

But can you please list the evidence that trayvon started it?  I dont think there is any. 

[tonymctones]

ZImmerman has ZERO evidence to corroborate trayvon started the fight.

There's plenty of evidence he was LOSING the fight and screaming for help.

But can you please list the evidence that trayvon started it?  I dont think there is any. 

can you please list the evidence you have to back up any of your claims?

well then, zimmerman can backup some of his claims...YOU CANT!!!

[240 is Back]

can you please list the evidence you have to back up any of your claims?

well then, zimmerman can backup some of his claims...YOU CANT!!!

HAHAHAHAHHA   there is no evidence that either man started the fight.

There is a shitload of evidence that trayvon ran away (zimm admitted it)
There is a shitload of eviednce that zimm walked from truck to a spot 2 blocks away for confrontation
There is a shitload of evidence that zimm believed TM was a burglar
There is a shitload of evidence that zimm was angry - use of the F word, calling Tm an asshole
There is a shitload of evidence that zimm pursued TM two blocks into the darkness wearing a gun

We agree there is ZERO evidence which may started the fight.  But the jury may look at all of these items and believe there's a damn high likelihood Zimm started it.

There are plenty of times when 2 ppl fight, no witnesses, and one ends up dead.  If a lack of a physical witness meant you walked, you'd have a LOT more people just waiting until dark, chasing their enemy 2 blocks while calling him as asshole, ,shooting his heart out his back once nobody is around, then shrugging it off...

ZERO evidence either man started fight.  Plenty of evidence ZImm was aggressor all the way up to the confrontation.  enjoy your 30 years in jail, zimm.

[tonymctones]

HAHAHAHAHHA   there is no evidence that either man started the fight.

There is a shitload of evidence that trayvon ran away (zimm admitted it)
There is a shitload of eviednce that zimm walked from truck to a spot 2 blocks away for confrontation
There is a shitload of evidence that zimm believed TM was a burglar
There is a shitload of evidence that zimm was angry - use of the F word, calling Tm an asshole
There is a shitload of evidence that zimm pursued TM two blocks into the darkness wearing a gun

We agree there is ZERO evidence which may started the fight.  But the jury may look at all of these items and believe there's a damn high likelihood Zimm started it.

There are plenty of times when 2 ppl fight, no witnesses, and one ends up dead.  If a lack of a physical witness meant you walked, you'd have a LOT more people just waiting until dark, chasing their enemy 2 blocks while calling him as asshole, ,shooting his heart out his back once nobody is around, then shrugging it off...

ZERO evidence either man started fight.  Plenty of evidence ZImm was aggressor all the way up to the confrontation.  enjoy your 30 years in jail, zimm.

not at all plenty of evidence that he disengaged his following while carrying his LICENSED pistol and went back to his truck(by plenty im using your loose definition)

Plenty of evidence that he was indeed being assualted

none of this matters however b/c none of the shit you have "evidence" for is illegal...

to bad shit head!!!

[240 is Back]

not at all plenty of evidence that he disengaged his following while carrying his LICENSED pistol and went back to his truck(by plenty im using your loose definition)
Plenty of evidence that he was indeed being assualted
none of this matters however b/c none of the shit you have "evidence" for is illegal...
to bad shit head!!!

The fight happened two blocks from his truck.  within what, 3 minutes?  Something like 3 mintues between the time he hung up and the time 911 calls recorded shots?  how long was it?

yeah, good luck there.  Really, he fccked up.  it's all on tape.  he admitted trayvon ran away.  he created the entire shitstorm.  And your defense is "but but but nobody saw the shooting itself"... ignoring the fact he's on 911 tape chasing a kid and admitting he was the one doing the pursuit...

Sorry, I think the shoot at the moment was legal.  But I think he's going to prison.  "He ran away" then you had to shoot to defend youself?  and its true cause you can't prove otherwise cause i killed the witness"   hahaha oh sweet sassy molassey.

[tonymctones]

The fight happened two blocks from his truck.  within what, 3 minutes?  Something like 3 mintues between the time he hung up and the time 911 calls recorded shots?  how long was it?

yeah, good luck there.  Really, he fccked up.  it's all on tape.  he admitted trayvon ran away.  he created the entire shitstorm.  And your defense is "but but but nobody saw the shooting itself"... ignoring the fact he's on 911 tape chasing a kid and admitting he was the one doing the pursuit...

Sorry, I think the shoot at the moment was legal.  But I think he's going to prison.  "He ran away" then you had to shoot to defend youself?  and its true cause you can't prove otherwise cause i killed the witness"   hahaha oh sweet sassy molassey.

LOL at your timing and self biased logic you uneducated moron...

none of that proves that he wasnt on his way back to his truck, I never said he didnt have a hand in the tragedy.

ONLY THAT THERE ISNT ANY EVIDENCE THAT HE COMMITTED A CRIME!!!

He also admits that he stopped on the 911 tape, but you disregard that information why?

what logic do you use to use one piece of info and not another from 30 secs later? hmmmm.....

It doesnt matter what you think, its what you can prove.


SO, STILL NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE HE COMMITTED A CRIME HUH???

[240 is Back]

he shot someone.

there is evidence he was the one doing the pursuit...
there is evndence he believed the man was on drugs...
there is evidence he was angry and using profanity and calling the victim names...
there is evidence the kid was almost home and he was nowhere near his home....

There's a dead fcking body on the ground.  Now, jurors have to decide if they believe the living dude, that he was a calm rational dude, not angry, not looking for a confrontation, only running two blocks with gun calling names  - but that somehow magically ended right before he was confronted.

Or, they have to decide the dude with a gun chasing a kid 2 blocks while calling him names found kid, and shot his ass.

I like how it's gone from "lots of evidence he was attacked" all the way to "no evidence who started it" to "no evidence of a crime". 

[tonymctones]

he shot someone.

there is evidence he was the one doing the pursuit...
there is evndence he believed the man was on drugs...
there is evidence he was angry and using profanity and calling the victim names...
there is evidence the kid was almost home and he was nowhere near his home....

There's a dead fcking body on the ground.  Now, jurors have to decide if they believe the living dude, that he was a calm rational dude, not angry, not looking for a confrontation, only running two blocks with gun calling names  - but that somehow magically ended right before he was confronted.

Or, they have to decide the dude with a gun chasing a kid 2 blocks while calling him names found kid, and shot his ass.

I like how it's gone from "lots of evidence he was attacked" all the way to "no evidence who started it" to "no evidence of a crime". 

who ever said he was attacked?

he was assaulted, we do know this...

fact of the matter is there is evidence to back up parts of zimmermans story.

You however have no evidence.

Also you play that 911 tape and you get a calm, rational sounding individual. Not some ranting, angry lunatic that you want to believe he was.

there is no evidence to suppor that zimmerman commited a crime, right?

i like how you go from no evidence to he will be convicted...uneducated moron here folks

[The True Adonis]

yep and that's why I expect the ambulance to take Zimmerman to the hospital if he had any kind of potential serious head injury

if he had a broken nose that should be known my now too

let's be perfectly clear, I have no doubt that Zimmerman THOUGHT he was in mortal danger but from what we know from the info the public domain that clearly does not appear to be the case

In NC THINKING that you are in mortal danger is enough to shoot someone in self defense.  Also, we have Castle Doctrine which covers your house as well as your car.  If anyone APPEARS to be committing a felony or is ABOUT TO COMMIT one, you can shoot, no questions asked.  Its a wonderful law to have.

[240 is Back]

he was assaulted, we do know this...

No.  We don't know that he was assaulted.

We only know that they were on the ground in a struggle and he was losing. 

We don't know who started it.  Zero witnesses to how it started. 

All we know is that his fat ass was losing a fight.  We don't know who swung first. 

[Option D]

the eyewitness only tells us that zimmerman was losing a fight.

not who started the fight. 

And there are a Lot of times when a person is convicted of a crime even when there isn't a 'witness who saw the whole damn thing'.

dING DING DING..

Like what the fuck man.. you cant start a fight with someone.. get beat up, shoot them, and say " self defense"...like what the fuck are we talkin about over here

[Option D]

can you please list the evidence you have to back up any of your claims?

well then, zimmerman can backup some of his claims...YOU CANT!!!

hell yeah he can back up his claims.. the only other person that can dispute it is 6 feet deep right now.. tha fuck

[whork]

No.  We don't know that he was assaulted.

We only know that they were on the ground in a struggle and he was losing. 

We don't know who started it.  Zero witnesses to how it started. 

All we know is that his fat ass was losing a fight.  We don't know who swung first. 

You need to be man enough to defend using your fists and not your gun

Othervise you could get in fights and you were on the losing end you would pull the gun. Guns are for fags

[Straw Man]

The fact that an eye witness saw trayvon fighting with him, on top of him lends credibility to his story.
Again you have absolutely nothing to back up your story, just opinion based on opinion.

why do you take the other self defense story at face value then?

I think they guy was taunting him, telling him that he has just got back from plowing his wife. When the guy said stop and moved to shake hands and ask for a truce the guy shot him in the head.

I have no proof of any of this, it is just my opinion...

I disagree

I don't think it means anything other than at one moment Martin was on top of Zimmerman

It doesn't lend any support to the need for deadly force and obviously no support for who started or escalated the confrontation

Zimmerman made a choice that night to use deadly force and we, as a society via our legal system, get to decide whether that action was justfiable or not.  There is no question that Zimmerman shot an unarmed teenager so the only questions is was the use of deadly force justifiable.

[Straw Man]

do you know what the EMT's report was?
I bet you they told zimmerman that he should go to the hospital but he decided against it.

I agree on the broken nose but then again that isnt something you have to go to the doctor for either. Ive had dislocated fingers, probably a broken toe and I didnt go to the doctor.

Know why?

My mom told me that the doctor wouldnt be able to do much if anything for me anyway...LOL

my point is some ppl dont go to the doctor unless they HAVE TO...

no I don't

do you?

[Straw Man]

You need to be man enough to defend using your fists and not your gun

Othervise you could get in fights and you were on the losing end you would pull the gun. Guns are for fags

I'd speculate that Zimmerman never would have left his truck if he weren't carrying a gun

This guy created this situation when he chose to leave his truck and pursue Martin

[Shockwave]

This is getting pathetic.



And 240, YOURE the one that has to substantiate your claims, Zimmermans claims under law is fact until proven false.
Zimmerman can corroborate parts of his story.
You can prove NONE of his story false.

So GTFO until you can prove any one single part of his story as a lie.

And dont give me this "He cant prove Trayvon started it!", Cause you cant prove Trayvon DIDNT start it, and thats what has to happen for your story to be even given a second thought.

He can prove parts.
You can disprove NONE.

Zimmerman - 1
240 - shame

[Straw Man]

This is getting pathetic.



And 240, YOURE the one that has to substantiate your claims, Zimmermans claims under law is fact until proven false.Zimmerman can corroborate parts of his story.
You can prove NONE of his story false.

So GTFO until you can prove any one single part of his story as a lie.

And dont give me this "He cant prove Trayvon started it!", Cause you cant prove Trayvon DIDNT start it, and thats what has to happen for your story to be even given a second thought.

He can prove parts.
You can disprove NONE.

Zimmerman - 1
240 - shame

and we as a society should have the opportunity to investigate and determine whether this guys claims are true or false

that is a lot different then taking his word at the scene of an event where he shoots to death and unarmed person and then get's to go home with no investigation or opportunity by the state to see if he is telling the truth or not

btw - on the topic of Zimmerman being someone who tells the truth, he was sitting on 200k in donations while claiming poverty at his bail hearing

I wouldn't trust the guy as far as I could spit

[Shockwave]

and we as a society should have the opportunity to investigate and determine whether this guys claims are true or false

that is a lot different then taking his word at the scene of an event where he shoots to death and unarmed person and then get's to go home with no investigation or opportunity by the state to see if he is telling the truth or not

btw - on the topic of Zimmerman being someone who tells the truth, he was sitting on 200k in donations while claiming poverty at his bail hearing

I wouldn't trust the guy as far as I could spit

Youre missing the point, im not arguing the guy should be investigated. Im saying that 240's claims are completely without evidence, and yet he tries to convict him based on nothing, while ignoring that Zimmerman has more evidence to corroborate his story than 240 has to discredit it.

Until 240 has ANYTHING that he can use to prove Zimmerman's story wrong, he's just blowing hot air. Thats my point. Yet he acts like Zimmerman has no credibility but 240's trailer predicitions are absolute fact, like the 240's "fact" that he was drunk cause he was heading home from target. His evidence? His head was bleeding, must be from alcohol.
True statement.

Im not arguing the guy should be investigated, im saying that under our system, his story is fact (especially since he has evidence to corroborate parts of it) unless they can prove him wrong.

[Straw Man]

Youre missing the point, im not arguing the guy should be investigated. Im saying that 240's claims are completely without evidence, and yet he tries to convict him based on nothing, while ignoring that Zimmerman has more evidence to corroborate his story than 240 has to discredit it.

Until 240 has ANYTHING that he can use to prove Zimmerman's story wrong, he's just blowing hot air. Thats my point. Yet he acts like Zimmerman has no credibility but 240's trailer predicitions are absolute fact, like the 240's "fact" that he was drunk cause he was heading home from target. His evidence? His head was bleeding, must be from alcohol.
True statement.

Im not arguing the guy should be investigated, im saying that under our system, his story is fact (especially since he has evidence to corroborate parts of it) unless they can prove him wrong.

Ok - I haven't read all of 240's posts on this subject

[dario73]

I will be surprised if Zimmerman serves any prison time. He will be a free man.

[Fury]

I will be surprised if Zimmerman serves any prison time. He will be a free man.

Rightfully so. Try as they might, rule of law will win out over the lynch mob.

[Shockwave]

Rightfully so. Try as they might, rule of law will win out over the lynch mob.

Well... Hopefully.
You can never count out the possibility of a jury that has already made up its mind prior to the case.
You would hope not... but the possibility always exists.
Hopefully the judge just throws it out based on lack of evidence (going by the prosecutors statement during the bail hearing), but I cant see that happening in a 2nd degree murder case.