You ignored what I said about his tone of voice on the police call. His tone of voice was not the voice of some vigilante that was bent on going out of his way to get justice for what had been going on.
Who cares about what he should have done? Most issues happen because someone did something they shouldn't have. You can't put full blame on Zimmerman just because he chose door number 1. Trayvon had the option to simply find out exactly why Zimmerman was following him before he started swinging. Putting full blame on Zimmerman simply because he didn't head the words of a dispatcher is simply ignorance at its finest.
You would think that if he was a racist son of a girl that he would have screwed up on at least one of the other 40 or so calls to police. Or even if he was hell bent on getting even with the burglars.
If he moved from the neighborhood because of the crime then you could surely call him a coward. Clint Eastwood wouldn't have moved. Did you ever see the movie Grand Torino?
Just because you stay to help battle the criminals doesn't make you a vigilante. Especially with his tone of voice when he thinks there is going to be a confrontation.
You ignored what I said about his tone of voice on the police call. His tone of voice was not the voice of some vigilante that was bent on going out of his way to get justice for what had been going on.
Who cares about what he should have done? Most issues happen because someone did something they shouldn't have. You can't put full blame on Zimmerman just because he chose door number 1. Trayvon had the option to simply find out exactly why Zimmerman was following him before he started swinging. Putting full blame on Zimmerman simply because he didn't head the words of a dispatcher is simply ignorance at its finest.
You would think that if he was a racist son of a girl that he would have screwed up on at least one of the other 40 or so calls to police. Or even if he was hell bent on getting even with the burglars.
If he moved from the neighborhood because of the crime then you could surely call him a coward. Clint Eastwood wouldn't have moved. Did you ever see the movie Grand Torino?
Just because you stay to help battle the criminals doesn't make you a vigilante. Especially with his tone of voice when he thinks there is going to be a confrontation.
Bowl -- I am not going into examples because the entirety of your posts are examples. I do not need to go through every sentence.
Reread through your posts in this thread if you really want an answer. They are littered with speculative comments...
You talk about
1) tone of voice
2) motivation when the cops are coming
3) scaling back when winning a fight (despite being in the heat of the moment)
4) Travon sucker punching Z...
5) Z not wanting to use his gun based because he his was concealed.
6) the points you make about the 35 other calls (what does that prove) etc...
These are just a few examples of speculation... If not speculation than what are they?????
Speculation is not a bad word - so do not get so offended. It just means that your are basing your opinion based on your interpretation of what you believe happened.
Bowl -- I am not going into examples because the entirety of your posts are examples. I do not need to go through every sentence.
Reread through your posts in this thread if you really want an answer. They are littered with speculative comments...
You talk about
1) tone of voice
2) motivation when the cops are coming
3) scaling back when winning a fight (despite being in the heat of the moment)
4) Travon sucker punching Z...
5) Z not wanting to use his gun based because he his was concealed.
6) the points you make about the 35 other calls (what does that prove) etc...
These are just a few examples of speculation... If not speculation than what are they?????
Speculation is not a bad word - so do not get so offended. It just means that your are basing your opinion based on your interpretation of what you believe happened.
Is that the best you can do for detail? Anyone can say someone is being ignorant. But please elaborate as to what makes it ignorant.
I bet you can't do it. Just like it pains you to have this discussion because you can't refute what I've said.
But you'll choose some way of deflecting avoiding the whole thing. I know the real reason.
and contrary to what you believe -- I originally wanted to avoid the discussion because you and I have had EXHAUSTIVE discussions on this topic. And therefore anything else is redundant and pointless.
Just because a new thread is made on this topic -- Why should you and I go through the motions of discussing a topic that we have 1) gone through IN GREAT DEPTH recently and 2) we both know that neither of us are going to be swayed by the other?
Is that the best you can do for detail? Anyone can say someone is being ignorant. But please elaborate as to what makes it ignorant.
I bet you can't do it. Just like it pains you to have this discussion because you can't refute what I've said.
But you'll choose some way of deflecting avoiding the whole thing. I know the real reason.
and contrary to what you believe -- I originally wanted to avoid the discussion because you and I have had EXHAUSTIVE discussions on this topic. And therefore anything else is redundant and pointless.
Just because a new thread is made on this topic -- Why should you and I go through the motions of discussing a topic that we have 1) gone through IN GREAT DEPTH recently and 2) we both know that neither of us are going to be swayed by the other?
If you follow someone around the world that would be stalking and that could very easily be taken in a threatening manner.
Zimm can say anything he wants about Martin doubling back or any other part of the account of the story.
He definitely has some motivation to make it look like Martin was the aggressor and the bad guy.
Unfortunately we will never know the other side of the story because he followed after Martin, as he said in the 911 transcript, instead of doing what the dispatcher told him to do.
I just see more opportunities where Zimm could have defused the situation as oppose to where Martin could have. Not saying its entirely Zimm's fault but it seems most of it is.
If you follow someone around the world that would be stalking and that could very easily be taken in a threatening manner.
Zimm can say anything he wants about Martin doubling back or any other part of the account of the story.
He definitely has some motivation to make it look like Martin was the aggressor and the bad guy.
Unfortunately we will never know the other side of the story because he followed after Martin, as he said in the 911 transcript, instead of doing what the dispatcher told him to do.
I just see more opportunities where Zimm could have defused the situation as oppose to where Martin could have. Not saying its entirely Zimm's fault but it seems most of it is.
Don't forget that I have said more than once...when I first came across this story for 3 weeks I was on your side of this. Because I didn't dig all that deep into the witness statements and the chronological order of things.
I switched sides on the whole thing after I dove in and did some homework.
The main thing that some of these people are saying is that Z is guilty of murder because he kept following Trayvon after he was told that he didn't need to do it.
I checked the murder statute and that doesn't equal the elements necessary for a murder charge.
Don't forget that I have said more than once...when I first came across this story for 3 weeks I was on your side of this. Because I didn't dig all that deep into the witness statements and the chronological order of things.
I switched sides on the whole thing after I dove in and did some homework.
The main thing that some of these people are saying is that Z is guilty of murder because he kept following Trayvon after he was told that he didn't need to do it.
I checked the murder statute and that doesn't equal the elements necessary for a murder charge.
If you follow someone around the world that would be stalking and that could very easily be taken in a threatening manner.
Zimm can say anything he wants about Martin doubling back or any other part of the account of the story.
He definitely has some motivation to make it look like Martin was the aggressor and the bad guy.
Unfortunately we will never know the other side of the story because he followed after Martin, as he said in the 911 transcript, instead of doing what the dispatcher told him to do.
I just see more opportunities where Zimm could have defused the situation as oppose to where Martin could have. Not saying its entirely Zimm's fault but it seems most of it is.
Very true, thats why we look at things like tone of voice when he thinks he might be confronted (in his truck with a locked door).
And then we look to see what happened the other 35 times he called police to report suspicious activity.
And then we look at the reasonable fact that Zimmerman knew the cops were on the way. That is not speculation as some other ignorant people might suggest.
What are the chances that Zimmerman gonna clown up when he knows the cops COULD be there in 10 seconds or whenever?
If you follow someone around the world that would be stalking and that could very easily be taken in a threatening manner.
Zimm can say anything he wants about Martin doubling back or any other part of the account of the story.
He definitely has some motivation to make it look like Martin was the aggressor and the bad guy.
Unfortunately we will never know the other side of the story because he followed after Martin, as he said in the 911 transcript, instead of doing what the dispatcher told him to do.
I just see more opportunities where Zimm could have defused the situation as oppose to where Martin could have. Not saying its entirely Zimm's fault but it seems most of it is.
Very true, thats why we look at things like tone of voice when he thinks he might be confronted (in his truck with a locked door).
And then we look to see what happened the other 35 times he called police to report suspicious activity.
And then we look at the reasonable fact that Zimmerman knew the cops were on the way. That is not speculation as some other ignorant people might suggest.
What are the chances that Zimmerman gonna clown up when he knows the cops COULD be there in 10 seconds or whenever?
Don't forget that I have said more than once...when I first came across this story for 3 weeks I was on your side of this. Because I didn't dig all that deep into the witness statements and the chronological order of things.
I switched sides on the whole thing after I dove in and did some homework.
The main thing that some of these people are saying is that Z is guilty of murder because he kept following Trayvon after he was told that he didn't need to do it.
I checked the murder statute and that doesn't equal the elements necessary for a murder charge.
Don't forget that I have said more than once...when I first came across this story for 3 weeks I was on your side of this. Because I didn't dig all that deep into the witness statements and the chronological order of things.
I switched sides on the whole thing after I dove in and did some homework.
The main thing that some of these people are saying is that Z is guilty of murder because he kept following Trayvon after he was told that he didn't need to do it.
I checked the murder statute and that doesn't equal the elements necessary for a murder charge.
You're not a defense attorney in the state of Florida neither do you even have a law degree or an graduate degree (most likely) maybe not even a degree at all... Try not to get offended I'm only speculating based on your absurd comments over the course of time you've spent here on covers that have been characterized by really asinine comments as well as stupid ones..
However with all of that being said... Try to focus on what I'm about to type here instead: We the public will witness this trial beggining on April 22.
Again though, however, IF zimmerman does see jail time (25 years to life) it will be because of a decision by a jury, not bowslits very limited understanding of murder laws...
You're not a defense attorney in the state of Florida neither do you even have a law degree or an graduate degree (most likely) maybe not even a degree at all... Try not to get offended I'm only speculating based on your absurd comments over the course of time you've spent here on covers that have been characterized by really asinine comments as well as stupid ones..
However with all of that being said... Try to focus on what I'm about to type here instead: We the public will witness this trial beggining on April 22.
Again though, however, IF zimmerman does see jail time (25 years to life) it will be because of a decision by a jury, not bowslits very limited understanding of murder laws...
You often see that especially those who are relegated to corrected spelling mistakes, grammatical mistakes, whatever he wishes to call it....
Point is.....IF zimmerman does see jail time (25 years to
life) it will be because of a decision by a jury, not bowslits very
limited understanding of murder laws...
Ok S hole.
I said that following someone doesn't qualify as murder and you had a problem with that statement and tried to censor me.
Please tell me what is wrong with that statement that makes it so absurd?
You often see that especially those who are relegated to corrected spelling mistakes, grammatical mistakes, whatever he wishes to call it....
Point is.....IF zimmerman does see jail time (25 years to
life) it will be because of a decision by a jury, not bowslits very
limited understanding of murder laws...
Ok S hole.
I said that following someone doesn't qualify as murder and you had a problem with that statement and tried to censor me.
Please tell me what is wrong with that statement that makes it so absurd?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.