She-Guevara racist white nationalist
Comments
-
"Stalks, runs after him when he runs away, weird how you left off stops running about 10 seconds later. 99.9% responsible" But Coug never claimed Zimmerman "started" the fight and I lack the intellectual flexibility?creepycoug said:SFGbob said:
I made the comparison dumbass because Hondo thought that piece of information was important. The fact someone doesn't have a gun doesn't make them non-violent.creepycoug said:
And @SFGbob is selling you a bag of shit. It was this comparison by Bob to which I made reference:RaceBannon said:
Because they both caught the attention of the White Housecreepycoug said:
You defend having your head in your ass dumb dumb.SFGbob said:I defend the facts while you talk out your ass Coug.
Why again are the Mike Brown and Treyvon Martin cases comparable? I'm super duper curious to hear that rationalization?
Go back 27 pages and that's how this started
Obama picking the wrong horses to ride on his social justice kick
He armed himself with the sidewalk that he smashed Zimmerman's head into. I guess Mike Brown couldn't have been the aggressor either since he too was unarmed.
Of course, we know that there were just a few differences, starting with the facts that Brown was dealing with police officers, had tried to wrestle away an officer's weapon, failed to obey and order to stand down, and had earlier in the day committed a robbery. Martin, by comparison, was walking and had a track record of acting tuff and smoking weed!!!!!
I wonder why Bob thinks Brown and Martin are comparable dead black boys?
Dances right on the line and begs to be called a racist, and then loses his shit when someone does.
I don't need to go there.
Call me a racist. I don't give a shit. You know nothing about me. Hell you're a liberal, it's got to be killing you that you haven't already done so.
Call me a liberal. I don't give a shit. You know nothing about me. Hell, you're a giant faggot, and I have a good sense from your writings about your other values too. If the label fits, wear it. IDGAF.SFGbob said:
I made the comparison dumbass because Hondo thought that piece of information was important. The fact someone doesn't have a gun doesn't make them non-violent.creepycoug said:
And @SFGbob is selling you a bag of shit. It was this comparison by Bob to which I made reference:RaceBannon said:
Because they both caught the attention of the White Housecreepycoug said:
You defend having your head in your ass dumb dumb.SFGbob said:I defend the facts while you talk out your ass Coug.
Why again are the Mike Brown and Treyvon Martin cases comparable? I'm super duper curious to hear that rationalization?
Go back 27 pages and that's how this started
Obama picking the wrong horses to ride on his social justice kick
He armed himself with the sidewalk that he smashed Zimmerman's head into. I guess Mike Brown couldn't have been the aggressor either since he too was unarmed.
Of course, we know that there were just a few differences, starting with the facts that Brown was dealing with police officers, had tried to wrestle away an officer's weapon, failed to obey and order to stand down, and had earlier in the day committed a robbery. Martin, by comparison, was walking and had a track record of acting tuff and smoking weed!!!!!
I wonder why Bob thinks Brown and Martin are comparable dead black boys?
Dances right on the line and begs to be called a racist, and then loses his shit when someone does.
I don't need to go there.
Call me a racist. I don't give a shit. You know nothing about me. Hell you're a liberal, it's got to be killing you that you haven't already done so.
It was important. A grown man, at night, stalks an unarmed kid doing nothing wrong, chases him when he runs away, nobody sees what happens next, and you and your idiot buddies think all that matters is the imbecile responsible for 99.9% of the entire thing turned out to be a shitty fighter and got his ass kicked by a kid doing what most of us would might well have done in the same situation. And you both lack any intellectual flexibility to see any side of this but the one that fits your political agenda, and then whine like a bitch that the matter was politicized by the other guy. It's just too fucking rich.
You are a special kind of candy ass and would do everyone a favor by hanging yourself.
There was a fucking trial, all of your bullshit was addressed and rejected by the jury.
What's my political agenda in this matter Coug? Don't hurt yourself dodging the question Kunt. -
OJ was acquitted as well.SFGbob said:
"Stalks, runs after him when he runs away, weird how you left off stops running about 10 seconds later. 99.9% responsible" But Coug never claimed Zimmerman "started" the fight and I lack the intellectual flexibility?creepycoug said:SFGbob said:
I made the comparison dumbass because Hondo thought that piece of information was important. The fact someone doesn't have a gun doesn't make them non-violent.creepycoug said:
And @SFGbob is selling you a bag of shit. It was this comparison by Bob to which I made reference:RaceBannon said:
Because they both caught the attention of the White Housecreepycoug said:
You defend having your head in your ass dumb dumb.SFGbob said:I defend the facts while you talk out your ass Coug.
Why again are the Mike Brown and Treyvon Martin cases comparable? I'm super duper curious to hear that rationalization?
Go back 27 pages and that's how this started
Obama picking the wrong horses to ride on his social justice kick
He armed himself with the sidewalk that he smashed Zimmerman's head into. I guess Mike Brown couldn't have been the aggressor either since he too was unarmed.
Of course, we know that there were just a few differences, starting with the facts that Brown was dealing with police officers, had tried to wrestle away an officer's weapon, failed to obey and order to stand down, and had earlier in the day committed a robbery. Martin, by comparison, was walking and had a track record of acting tuff and smoking weed!!!!!
I wonder why Bob thinks Brown and Martin are comparable dead black boys?
Dances right on the line and begs to be called a racist, and then loses his shit when someone does.
I don't need to go there.
Call me a racist. I don't give a shit. You know nothing about me. Hell you're a liberal, it's got to be killing you that you haven't already done so.
Call me a liberal. I don't give a shit. You know nothing about me. Hell, you're a giant faggot, and I have a good sense from your writings about your other values too. If the label fits, wear it. IDGAF.SFGbob said:
I made the comparison dumbass because Hondo thought that piece of information was important. The fact someone doesn't have a gun doesn't make them non-violent.creepycoug said:
And @SFGbob is selling you a bag of shit. It was this comparison by Bob to which I made reference:RaceBannon said:
Because they both caught the attention of the White Housecreepycoug said:
You defend having your head in your ass dumb dumb.SFGbob said:I defend the facts while you talk out your ass Coug.
Why again are the Mike Brown and Treyvon Martin cases comparable? I'm super duper curious to hear that rationalization?
Go back 27 pages and that's how this started
Obama picking the wrong horses to ride on his social justice kick
He armed himself with the sidewalk that he smashed Zimmerman's head into. I guess Mike Brown couldn't have been the aggressor either since he too was unarmed.
Of course, we know that there were just a few differences, starting with the facts that Brown was dealing with police officers, had tried to wrestle away an officer's weapon, failed to obey and order to stand down, and had earlier in the day committed a robbery. Martin, by comparison, was walking and had a track record of acting tuff and smoking weed!!!!!
I wonder why Bob thinks Brown and Martin are comparable dead black boys?
Dances right on the line and begs to be called a racist, and then loses his shit when someone does.
I don't need to go there.
Call me a racist. I don't give a shit. You know nothing about me. Hell you're a liberal, it's got to be killing you that you haven't already done so.
It was important. A grown man, at night, stalks an unarmed kid doing nothing wrong, chases him when he runs away, nobody sees what happens next, and you and your idiot buddies think all that matters is the imbecile responsible for 99.9% of the entire thing turned out to be a shitty fighter and got his ass kicked by a kid doing what most of us would might well have done in the same situation. And you both lack any intellectual flexibility to see any side of this but the one that fits your political agenda, and then whine like a bitch that the matter was politicized by the other guy. It's just too fucking rich.
You are a special kind of candy ass and would do everyone a favor by hanging yourself.
There was a fucking trial, all of your bullshit was addressed and rejected by the jury.
What's my political agenda in this matter Coug? Don't hurt yourself dodging the question Kunt. -
And now he knows that Zimmerman was threatening Trademark. But you're not claiming Zimmerman "started" the fight right Coug? He is just 99.9% responsible and he "instigated" it and he "stalked" him but he didn't "start" the fight, right Kunt?creepycoug said:
Maybe you and Sled are giant pussies and have never been in an altercation. Punching someone who was threatening you doesn't make you a thug whether the guy could handle himself or, like Zimmerman, could not. I'm starting to see why you two identify with Zimmerman so much.SFGbob said:
As soon as he punched him in the nose I'm sure Zimmerman figured out that Trademark was a thug.creepycoug said:Sledog said:Zimmerman did noting illegal.
Injuries of some sort are often left during an assault. Not always. They clearly were in a fight as people saw Martin getting the better of him. And Martin had no marks other than what was on his hand. Ostensibly, then, it can happen rather easily, depending on the matchup. Like this one.
I thought court was about facts not conjecture. Circumstantial evidence has been used to send people to the chair. Facts are established by a preponderance of evidence. Sometimes, they are established by appealing to bias. Since you have been in court, you know that everything that is alleged to have happened is rarely done so with 100%, incontrovertible, video evidence. The fact that Zimmerman was chasing Martin doesn't mean anything to you means that you would have been a great juror for Zimmerman. Maybe if the kid in question had been someone that made you less culturally uncomfortable, you might have been more objective. In any event, you misapprehend my use of the term conjecture because you don't read well.
Obviously I've been in actual courts and you've been where? As I mentioned in another post, I generally value staying out of jail, and I value my professional reputation. So I try not to break the law and wind up in court. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Or don't. IDRGAF
- Doesn't really matter; as the a jury person, I would have had trouble with the fact that Zimmerman was doing the shit he was doing that would put any person in reasonable apprehension of harm. You didn't understand that? But the burden of proof goes the other way, and the dearth of witness testimony of who started the altercation is what saved Zimmerman. You didn't understand that either?The only thing anyone saw or heard was the part of Martin getting the better of Zimmerman. And this, too, confused you? I guess you and Bob had the same shit parents. Education matters boy. Try and do better with your kids, if there's time.
Engrish prease.
Oh and it is dangerous to be a thug. An entirely reasonable thing to say. Except Zimmerman didn't know he was a thug. Or did he? How so?
Trayvon's friends knew the path he was on. They warned him that he should stop picking fights before someone shot him in the chest.
Prophetic
George Zimmerman's defense team is painting an unflattering picture of Trayvon Martin through his text messages, which it released yesterday—and they contain a haunting warning from a friend: "Boy don’t get one planted in ya chest," the friend writes. The text came three months before Trayvon was shot,
Sad. -
In summary:SFGbob said:
And now he knows that Zimmerman was threatening Trademark. But you're not claiming Zimmerman "started" the fight right Coug? He is just 99.9% responsible and he "instigated" it and he "stalked" him but he didn't "start" the fight, right Kunt?creepycoug said:
Maybe you and Sled are giant pussies and have never been in an altercation. Punching someone who was threatening you doesn't make you a thug whether the guy could handle himself or, like Zimmerman, could not. I'm starting to see why you two identify with Zimmerman so much.SFGbob said:
As soon as he punched him in the nose I'm sure Zimmerman figured out that Trademark was a thug.creepycoug said:Sledog said:Zimmerman did noting illegal.
Injuries of some sort are often left during an assault. Not always. They clearly were in a fight as people saw Martin getting the better of him. And Martin had no marks other than what was on his hand. Ostensibly, then, it can happen rather easily, depending on the matchup. Like this one.
I thought court was about facts not conjecture. Circumstantial evidence has been used to send people to the chair. Facts are established by a preponderance of evidence. Sometimes, they are established by appealing to bias. Since you have been in court, you know that everything that is alleged to have happened is rarely done so with 100%, incontrovertible, video evidence. The fact that Zimmerman was chasing Martin doesn't mean anything to you means that you would have been a great juror for Zimmerman. Maybe if the kid in question had been someone that made you less culturally uncomfortable, you might have been more objective. In any event, you misapprehend my use of the term conjecture because you don't read well.
Obviously I've been in actual courts and you've been where? As I mentioned in another post, I generally value staying out of jail, and I value my professional reputation. So I try not to break the law and wind up in court. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Or don't. IDRGAF
- Doesn't really matter; as the a jury person, I would have had trouble with the fact that Zimmerman was doing the shit he was doing that would put any person in reasonable apprehension of harm. You didn't understand that? But the burden of proof goes the other way, and the dearth of witness testimony of who started the altercation is what saved Zimmerman. You didn't understand that either?The only thing anyone saw or heard was the part of Martin getting the better of Zimmerman. And this, too, confused you? I guess you and Bob had the same shit parents. Education matters boy. Try and do better with your kids, if there's time.
Engrish prease.
Oh and it is dangerous to be a thug. An entirely reasonable thing to say. Except Zimmerman didn't know he was a thug. Or did he? How so?
Trayvon's friends knew the path he was on. They warned him that he should stop picking fights before someone shot him in the chest.
Prophetic
George Zimmerman's defense team is painting an unflattering picture of Trayvon Martin through his text messages, which it released yesterday—and they contain a haunting warning from a friend: "Boy don’t get one planted in ya chest," the friend writes. The text came three months before Trayvon was shot,
Sad.
Fat fucking hapless fools who murder unarmed minors under the guise of “neighborhood watch” make you very happy. The victims deserve it
You’ve never been in a physical altercation in your life life.
You are giant fucking coward.
Juries sometimes acquit murderers.
That about covers this thread.
-
And Bob is a liar.CirrhosisDawg said:
In summary:SFGbob said:
And now he knows that Zimmerman was threatening Trademark. But you're not claiming Zimmerman "started" the fight right Coug? He is just 99.9% responsible and he "instigated" it and he "stalked" him but he didn't "start" the fight, right Kunt?creepycoug said:
Maybe you and Sled are giant pussies and have never been in an altercation. Punching someone who was threatening you doesn't make you a thug whether the guy could handle himself or, like Zimmerman, could not. I'm starting to see why you two identify with Zimmerman so much.SFGbob said:
As soon as he punched him in the nose I'm sure Zimmerman figured out that Trademark was a thug.creepycoug said:Sledog said:Zimmerman did noting illegal.
Injuries of some sort are often left during an assault. Not always. They clearly were in a fight as people saw Martin getting the better of him. And Martin had no marks other than what was on his hand. Ostensibly, then, it can happen rather easily, depending on the matchup. Like this one.
I thought court was about facts not conjecture. Circumstantial evidence has been used to send people to the chair. Facts are established by a preponderance of evidence. Sometimes, they are established by appealing to bias. Since you have been in court, you know that everything that is alleged to have happened is rarely done so with 100%, incontrovertible, video evidence. The fact that Zimmerman was chasing Martin doesn't mean anything to you means that you would have been a great juror for Zimmerman. Maybe if the kid in question had been someone that made you less culturally uncomfortable, you might have been more objective. In any event, you misapprehend my use of the term conjecture because you don't read well.
Obviously I've been in actual courts and you've been where? As I mentioned in another post, I generally value staying out of jail, and I value my professional reputation. So I try not to break the law and wind up in court. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Or don't. IDRGAF
- Doesn't really matter; as the a jury person, I would have had trouble with the fact that Zimmerman was doing the shit he was doing that would put any person in reasonable apprehension of harm. You didn't understand that? But the burden of proof goes the other way, and the dearth of witness testimony of who started the altercation is what saved Zimmerman. You didn't understand that either?The only thing anyone saw or heard was the part of Martin getting the better of Zimmerman. And this, too, confused you? I guess you and Bob had the same shit parents. Education matters boy. Try and do better with your kids, if there's time.
Engrish prease.
Oh and it is dangerous to be a thug. An entirely reasonable thing to say. Except Zimmerman didn't know he was a thug. Or did he? How so?
Trayvon's friends knew the path he was on. They warned him that he should stop picking fights before someone shot him in the chest.
Prophetic
George Zimmerman's defense team is painting an unflattering picture of Trayvon Martin through his text messages, which it released yesterday—and they contain a haunting warning from a friend: "Boy don’t get one planted in ya chest," the friend writes. The text came three months before Trayvon was shot,
Sad.
Fat fucking hapless fools who murder unarmed minors under the guise of “neighborhood watch” make you very happy. The victims deserve it
You’ve never been in a physical altercation in your life life.
You are giant fucking coward.
Juries sometimes acquit murderers.
That about covers this thread. -
No it makes you guilty of battery. HTHcreepycoug said:
Maybe you and Sled are giant pussies and have never been in an altercation. Punching someone who was threatening you doesn't make you a thug whether the guy could handle himself or, like Zimmerman, could not. I'm starting to see why you two identify with Zimmerman so much.SFGbob said:
As soon as he punched him in the nose I'm sure Zimmerman figured out that Trademark was a thug.creepycoug said:Sledog said:Zimmerman did noting illegal.
Injuries of some sort are often left during an assault. Not always. They clearly were in a fight as people saw Martin getting the better of him. And Martin had no marks other than what was on his hand. Ostensibly, then, it can happen rather easily, depending on the matchup. Like this one.
I thought court was about facts not conjecture. Circumstantial evidence has been used to send people to the chair. Facts are established by a preponderance of evidence. Sometimes, they are established by appealing to bias. Since you have been in court, you know that everything that is alleged to have happened is rarely done so with 100%, incontrovertible, video evidence. The fact that Zimmerman was chasing Martin doesn't mean anything to you means that you would have been a great juror for Zimmerman. Maybe if the kid in question had been someone that made you less culturally uncomfortable, you might have been more objective. In any event, you misapprehend my use of the term conjecture because you don't read well.
Obviously I've been in actual courts and you've been where? As I mentioned in another post, I generally value staying out of jail, and I value my professional reputation. So I try not to break the law and wind up in court. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Or don't. IDRGAF
- Doesn't really matter; as the a jury person, I would have had trouble with the fact that Zimmerman was doing the shit he was doing that would put any person in reasonable apprehension of harm. You didn't understand that? But the burden of proof goes the other way, and the dearth of witness testimony of who started the altercation is what saved Zimmerman. You didn't understand that either?The only thing anyone saw or heard was the part of Martin getting the better of Zimmerman. And this, too, confused you? I guess you and Bob had the same shit parents. Education matters boy. Try and do better with your kids, if there's time.
Engrish prease.
Oh and it is dangerous to be a thug. An entirely reasonable thing to say. Except Zimmerman didn't know he was a thug. Or did he? How so?
Trayvon's friends knew the path he was on. They warned him that he should stop picking fights before someone shot him in the chest.
Prophetic
George Zimmerman's defense team is painting an unflattering picture of Trayvon Martin through his text messages, which it released yesterday—and they contain a haunting warning from a friend: "Boy don’t get one planted in ya chest," the friend writes. The text came three months before Trayvon was shot,
Sad. -
Yeah all the tough guys are attorneys!creepycoug said:
Maybe you and Sled are giant pussies and have never been in an altercation. Punching someone who was threatening you doesn't make you a thug whether the guy could handle himself or, like Zimmerman, could not. I'm starting to see why you two identify with Zimmerman so much.SFGbob said:
As soon as he punched him in the nose I'm sure Zimmerman figured out that Trademark was a thug.creepycoug said:Sledog said:Zimmerman did noting illegal.
Injuries of some sort are often left during an assault. Not always. They clearly were in a fight as people saw Martin getting the better of him. And Martin had no marks other than what was on his hand. Ostensibly, then, it can happen rather easily, depending on the matchup. Like this one.
I thought court was about facts not conjecture. Circumstantial evidence has been used to send people to the chair. Facts are established by a preponderance of evidence. Sometimes, they are established by appealing to bias. Since you have been in court, you know that everything that is alleged to have happened is rarely done so with 100%, incontrovertible, video evidence. The fact that Zimmerman was chasing Martin doesn't mean anything to you means that you would have been a great juror for Zimmerman. Maybe if the kid in question had been someone that made you less culturally uncomfortable, you might have been more objective. In any event, you misapprehend my use of the term conjecture because you don't read well.
Obviously I've been in actual courts and you've been where? As I mentioned in another post, I generally value staying out of jail, and I value my professional reputation. So I try not to break the law and wind up in court. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Or don't. IDRGAF
- Doesn't really matter; as the a jury person, I would have had trouble with the fact that Zimmerman was doing the shit he was doing that would put any person in reasonable apprehension of harm. You didn't understand that? But the burden of proof goes the other way, and the dearth of witness testimony of who started the altercation is what saved Zimmerman. You didn't understand that either?The only thing anyone saw or heard was the part of Martin getting the better of Zimmerman. And this, too, confused you? I guess you and Bob had the same shit parents. Education matters boy. Try and do better with your kids, if there's time.
Engrish prease.
Oh and it is dangerous to be a thug. An entirely reasonable thing to say. Except Zimmerman didn't know he was a thug. Or did he? How so?
Trayvon's friends knew the path he was on. They warned him that he should stop picking fights before someone shot him in the chest.
Prophetic
George Zimmerman's defense team is painting an unflattering picture of Trayvon Martin through his text messages, which it released yesterday—and they contain a haunting warning from a friend: "Boy don’t get one planted in ya chest," the friend writes. The text came three months before Trayvon was shot,
Sad. -
Not necessarily. HtHSledog said:
No it makes you guilty of battery. HTHcreepycoug said:
Maybe you and Sled are giant pussies and have never been in an altercation. Punching someone who was threatening you doesn't make you a thug whether the guy could handle himself or, like Zimmerman, could not. I'm starting to see why you two identify with Zimmerman so much.SFGbob said:
As soon as he punched him in the nose I'm sure Zimmerman figured out that Trademark was a thug.creepycoug said:Sledog said:Zimmerman did noting illegal.
Injuries of some sort are often left during an assault. Not always. They clearly were in a fight as people saw Martin getting the better of him. And Martin had no marks other than what was on his hand. Ostensibly, then, it can happen rather easily, depending on the matchup. Like this one.
I thought court was about facts not conjecture. Circumstantial evidence has been used to send people to the chair. Facts are established by a preponderance of evidence. Sometimes, they are established by appealing to bias. Since you have been in court, you know that everything that is alleged to have happened is rarely done so with 100%, incontrovertible, video evidence. The fact that Zimmerman was chasing Martin doesn't mean anything to you means that you would have been a great juror for Zimmerman. Maybe if the kid in question had been someone that made you less culturally uncomfortable, you might have been more objective. In any event, you misapprehend my use of the term conjecture because you don't read well.
Obviously I've been in actual courts and you've been where? As I mentioned in another post, I generally value staying out of jail, and I value my professional reputation. So I try not to break the law and wind up in court. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Or don't. IDRGAF
- Doesn't really matter; as the a jury person, I would have had trouble with the fact that Zimmerman was doing the shit he was doing that would put any person in reasonable apprehension of harm. You didn't understand that? But the burden of proof goes the other way, and the dearth of witness testimony of who started the altercation is what saved Zimmerman. You didn't understand that either?The only thing anyone saw or heard was the part of Martin getting the better of Zimmerman. And this, too, confused you? I guess you and Bob had the same shit parents. Education matters boy. Try and do better with your kids, if there's time.
Engrish prease.
Oh and it is dangerous to be a thug. An entirely reasonable thing to say. Except Zimmerman didn't know he was a thug. Or did he? How so?
Trayvon's friends knew the path he was on. They warned him that he should stop picking fights before someone shot him in the chest.
Prophetic
George Zimmerman's defense team is painting an unflattering picture of Trayvon Martin through his text messages, which it released yesterday—and they contain a haunting warning from a friend: "Boy don’t get one planted in ya chest," the friend writes. The text came three months before Trayvon was shot,
Sad. -
What a moron. Recycle the same shit that's been handed back to you and shoved up your ass 20x and ways.SFGbob said:
And now he knows that Zimmerman was threatening Trademark. But you're not claiming Zimmerman "started" the fight right Coug? He is just 99.9% responsible and he "instigated" it and he "stalked" him but he didn't "start" the fight, right Kunt?creepycoug said:
Maybe you and Sled are giant pussies and have never been in an altercation. Punching someone who was threatening you doesn't make you a thug whether the guy could handle himself or, like Zimmerman, could not. I'm starting to see why you two identify with Zimmerman so much.SFGbob said:
As soon as he punched him in the nose I'm sure Zimmerman figured out that Trademark was a thug.creepycoug said:Sledog said:Zimmerman did noting illegal.
Injuries of some sort are often left during an assault. Not always. They clearly were in a fight as people saw Martin getting the better of him. And Martin had no marks other than what was on his hand. Ostensibly, then, it can happen rather easily, depending on the matchup. Like this one.
I thought court was about facts not conjecture. Circumstantial evidence has been used to send people to the chair. Facts are established by a preponderance of evidence. Sometimes, they are established by appealing to bias. Since you have been in court, you know that everything that is alleged to have happened is rarely done so with 100%, incontrovertible, video evidence. The fact that Zimmerman was chasing Martin doesn't mean anything to you means that you would have been a great juror for Zimmerman. Maybe if the kid in question had been someone that made you less culturally uncomfortable, you might have been more objective. In any event, you misapprehend my use of the term conjecture because you don't read well.
Obviously I've been in actual courts and you've been where? As I mentioned in another post, I generally value staying out of jail, and I value my professional reputation. So I try not to break the law and wind up in court. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Or don't. IDRGAF
- Doesn't really matter; as the a jury person, I would have had trouble with the fact that Zimmerman was doing the shit he was doing that would put any person in reasonable apprehension of harm. You didn't understand that? But the burden of proof goes the other way, and the dearth of witness testimony of who started the altercation is what saved Zimmerman. You didn't understand that either?The only thing anyone saw or heard was the part of Martin getting the better of Zimmerman. And this, too, confused you? I guess you and Bob had the same shit parents. Education matters boy. Try and do better with your kids, if there's time.
Engrish prease.
Oh and it is dangerous to be a thug. An entirely reasonable thing to say. Except Zimmerman didn't know he was a thug. Or did he? How so?
Trayvon's friends knew the path he was on. They warned him that he should stop picking fights before someone shot him in the chest.
Prophetic
George Zimmerman's defense team is painting an unflattering picture of Trayvon Martin through his text messages, which it released yesterday—and they contain a haunting warning from a friend: "Boy don’t get one planted in ya chest," the friend writes. The text came three months before Trayvon was shot,
Sad.
Sad that you and Lenny struggle with basic English words and reading comprehension.
Sad, really.
But you use tuff words so you have that.
Dumb shit -
Yeah, it's so unfair to quote your own words back to you.creepycoug said:
What a moron. Recycle the same shit that's been handed back to you and shoved up your ass 20x and ways.SFGbob said:
And now he knows that Zimmerman was threatening Trademark. But you're not claiming Zimmerman "started" the fight right Coug? He is just 99.9% responsible and he "instigated" it and he "stalked" him but he didn't "start" the fight, right Kunt?creepycoug said:
Maybe you and Sled are giant pussies and have never been in an altercation. Punching someone who was threatening you doesn't make you a thug whether the guy could handle himself or, like Zimmerman, could not. I'm starting to see why you two identify with Zimmerman so much.SFGbob said:
As soon as he punched him in the nose I'm sure Zimmerman figured out that Trademark was a thug.creepycoug said:Sledog said:Zimmerman did noting illegal.
Injuries of some sort are often left during an assault. Not always. They clearly were in a fight as people saw Martin getting the better of him. And Martin had no marks other than what was on his hand. Ostensibly, then, it can happen rather easily, depending on the matchup. Like this one.
I thought court was about facts not conjecture. Circumstantial evidence has been used to send people to the chair. Facts are established by a preponderance of evidence. Sometimes, they are established by appealing to bias. Since you have been in court, you know that everything that is alleged to have happened is rarely done so with 100%, incontrovertible, video evidence. The fact that Zimmerman was chasing Martin doesn't mean anything to you means that you would have been a great juror for Zimmerman. Maybe if the kid in question had been someone that made you less culturally uncomfortable, you might have been more objective. In any event, you misapprehend my use of the term conjecture because you don't read well.
Obviously I've been in actual courts and you've been where? As I mentioned in another post, I generally value staying out of jail, and I value my professional reputation. So I try not to break the law and wind up in court. Maybe you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Or don't. IDRGAF
- Doesn't really matter; as the a jury person, I would have had trouble with the fact that Zimmerman was doing the shit he was doing that would put any person in reasonable apprehension of harm. You didn't understand that? But the burden of proof goes the other way, and the dearth of witness testimony of who started the altercation is what saved Zimmerman. You didn't understand that either?The only thing anyone saw or heard was the part of Martin getting the better of Zimmerman. And this, too, confused you? I guess you and Bob had the same shit parents. Education matters boy. Try and do better with your kids, if there's time.
Engrish prease.
Oh and it is dangerous to be a thug. An entirely reasonable thing to say. Except Zimmerman didn't know he was a thug. Or did he? How so?
Trayvon's friends knew the path he was on. They warned him that he should stop picking fights before someone shot him in the chest.
Prophetic
George Zimmerman's defense team is painting an unflattering picture of Trayvon Martin through his text messages, which it released yesterday—and they contain a haunting warning from a friend: "Boy don’t get one planted in ya chest," the friend writes. The text came three months before Trayvon was shot,
Sad.
Sad that you and Lenny struggle with basic English words and reading comprehension.
Sad, really.
But you use tuff words so you have that.
Dumb shit
