Trayvon Martin Case

[los panda]

Originally Posted by firstdown

You mean him calling the guy a F&^ing Cone brings race into the picture.LOL I think Zimmerman caused the problem but I don't think the other guy is the innocent little boy thay mak him out to be.

no, not even that, i'm still not sure i can hear him say that. i meant his tone, the way he describes martin, and other comments. as far as how innocent they make martin out to be, i have no idea, probably innocent enough not to be killed

[firstdown]

I agree its not 100% clear that's what he said but it goes with the tone he had with 911 and I cannot think of any other word to replace coon. I'm sure the right person can clean up the tape to hear what he did say.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I agree its not 100% clear that's what he said but it goes with the tone he had with 911 and I cannot think of any other word to replace coon. I'm sure the right person can clean up the tape to hear what he did say.

What about Cone?

[saden1]

This kid did nothing wrong and apparently you assholes think it's OK to shoot kids because they look suspicious or wear a hoddie and stand up to grown men stalking them.


Yo, close this thread before these morons say more stupid shit that makes no sense.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by saden1

This kid did nothing wrong and apparently you assholes think it's OK to shoot kids because they look suspicious or wear a hoddie and stand up to grown men stalking them.


Yo, close this thread before these morons say more stupid shit that makes no sense.

This post is like reading You Tube comments.

[RedskinRat]

Only one person can say for sure and that's the shooter.

Calling people '****ing morons' isn't helping the discussion.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Only one person can say for sure and that's the shooter.

Calling people '****ing morons' isn't helping the discussion.

Yet you have the fcking nerve to call the kid a "mouthy teenager." Get the fck out here dude with your bullshit. You have zero credibility.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by saden1

Yet you have the fcking nerve to call the kid a "mouthy teenager." Get the fck out here dude with your bullshit. You have zero credibility.

Line up 1,000 teenagers and I'll point out the 999 that are mouthy. Maybe I'm just inundated with mouthy teenagers where I live but I can only go by my experience.

And cursing someone out on a forum certainly lends an air of credibility....

/sarc

Your hostility is adorable.

[firstdown]

Not sure why they say this case is made tougher becuase of the stand your ground law. This law has nothing to do with what happend and does not apply to this situation. The killer followed and persue the person. People against the law want to use this case to have the law changed.

[RedskinRat]

Yeah, I can't even see how it applies in this case even in the most elastic of definitions.

He (the shooter) wasn't threatened, wasn't in his home or car.

It just adds fuel to the weak argument of anti-gun panty-wetters, which is what annoys me the most about the case.

[Daseal]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Yeah, I can't even see how it applies in this case even in the most elastic of definitions.

He (the shooter) wasn't threatened, wasn't in his home or car.

It just adds fuel to the weak argument of anti-gun panty-wetters, which is what annoys me the most about the case.

On the same page you cry about people calling you a moron and then sling insults. Hypocrisy is fun!

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Daseal

On the same page you cry about people calling you a moron and then sling insults. Hypocrisy is fun!

Where do I insult anyone here? Where am I crying?

Daseal, please feel free to ignore any of my responses unless you can stay on point and contribute.

[firstdown]

I think the problem the police are probably having is they don't have a witness to how the initial altercation started. All they have is the shooter saying he was attacked and a witness that saw the kid beating on the shooter.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I think the problem the police are probably having is they don't have a witness to how the initial altercation started. All they have is the shooter saying he was attacked and a witness that saw the kid beating on the shooter.

Where are you getting your facts from? The facts reported from all media outlets is as follows:

A witness to the physical altercation just prior to the shooting stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and beating him up, while the older man yelled for help.[27] Another witness, Mary Cutcher, has said in a TV interview that "there was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling",[28] but police say that she gave an official account to them that agreed with Zimmerman's story.[29][30] Cutcher and her roommate told CNN journalist Anderson Cooper that their own account of the incident to the police did not agree with Zimmerman's, and that they had demanded that the police retract that incorrect statement. They also said, about the police's attitude at the scene, that "they were siding with him [Zimmerman] from the start" and that they heard the pair in their backyard and a "very young voice" whining, with no sounds of a fight. They heard a gunshot; the crying stopped immediately, and they saw Zimmerman on his knees pinning Martin down on the ground.[31]

The police took Trayvon Martin's body and stored it in a morgue for three days, calling him "John Doe". Martin's family accuses the police of not asking any of the neighbours if they recognized Martin.[32] According to David Horsey, they also did not check his cellphone to find someone he knew.[33]

Regardless of what exactly happened it doesn't change the fact that you have this cunt following a young boy after being ordered not to and then shot him. On top of that you have an indifferent police that didn't absolutely nothing and is still doing absolutely nothing.

[RedskinRat]

Police Chief for Stanford has stepped down. Jumped before he was pushed.

They should have at least taken the shooter in for a chat.