Happy Trayvon Martin Day

Please explain how you can race bait, without including race?

Your moronic buddy is using racist stereotypes. Trayvon was not casing any houses. He was walking back to where he was staying after buying candy and a beverage.

He was no thug either. Again, he had no criminal record, unlike Zimmerman.
 
Your moronic buddy is using racist stereotypes. Trayvon was not casing any houses. He was walking back to where he was staying after buying candy and a beverage.

He was no thug either. Again, he had no criminal record, unlike Zimmerman.

You seem to be showing some racists tendencies of your own here; because it looks like you believe that Blacks are the only ones who can "case houses" or "act thugish".
Why do you auotmatically want to assign racism to him?
Had he or had he not been suspended from school twice?
Once for assault and once for being in possession.
Sounds kind of thugish to me.
 
You seem to be showing some racists tendencies of your own here; because it looks like you believe that Blacks are the only ones who can "case houses" or "act thugish".
Why do you auotmatically want to assign racism to him?
Had he or had he not been suspended from school twice?
Once for assault and once for being in possession.
Sounds kind of thugish to me.

Your sheet wearing buddy is race baiting. You being a moron or a racist yourself don't see it.

He was never suspended for assault or possession. He was suspended for having a baggie that the school suspected of having contained marijuana, for being late and for writing WTF on his locker. That might sound thuggish if you went to a catholic girls school.
 
Last edited:
So now you're admit that you're refusing to review documentation that just might question your preconceived assumptions. :good4u:

I have read the dispatch transcript several times and compared it against Zimmerman's reenactment. None of the things you claimed (that he stopped following, that he was returning to his vehicle and/or that Martin became the aggressor by confronting him) are documented in it. In fact, in the reneactment Zimmerman claims that he did not start returning to his vehicle until that call had ended. There is no documented proof of the claims you made and you and superfreak are just full of shit.
 
Your sheet wearing buddy is race baiting. You being a moron or a racist yourself don't see it.

He was never suspended for assault or possession. He was suspended for having a baggie that the school suspected of having contained marijuana, for being late and for writing WTF on his locker. That might sound thuggish if you went to a catholic girls school.

First of all, LOL. Secondly - I see you have never attended a Catholic girls school!
 
Your sheet wearing buddy is race baiting. You being a moron or a racist yourself don't see it.

He was never suspended for assault or possession. He was in suspended for having a baggie that the school suspected of having contained marijuana, for being late and for writing WTF on his locker. That might sound thuggish if you went to a catholic girls school.

So now your racism extends to accusations of "sheet wearing"!!
I hope you're aware that this says more about your perceptions, then any you've accused him of.

I wasn't aware that Martin's behavior was standard fare for the schools in your area.
In other parts of the country, they would appear to be thugish.
Are you purposefully ignoring him being caught with women’s rings and earrings and a screwdriver (“burglary tool”).

It also seems that you have no problem with him assaulting Zimmerman, without any certifiable provocation.

I'm just curious how long you've had these racist leanings?
 
So now your racism extends to accusations of "sheet wearing"!!
I hope you're aware that this says more about your perceptions, then any you've accused him of.

I wasn't aware that Martin's behavior was standard fare for the schools in your area.
In other parts of the country, they would appear to be thugish.
Are you purposefully ignoring him being caught with women’s rings and earrings and a screwdriver (“burglary tool”).

It also seems that you have no problem with him assaulting Zimmerman, without any certifiable provocation.

I'm just curious how long you've had these racist leanings?

Your attempts to shift focus are pathetic.

He was not supended for the jewelry or "burglary tool" which, as you point out, was just a screwdriver. Being tardy, writing some stupid shit on your locker and a baggie that may or may not have had marijuana in it is not "thuggish" but rather pretty common juvenile behavior. That word is used by racist to describe his behavior.

Zimmerman, who was arrested and charged with battery of a police officer and had domestic abuse issues seems to have a more troubled past. But then beating your wife is probably common in your area.

The claim is that Trayvon committed a battery on Zimmerman (assault is a threat). But it does seem provoked and who began the struggle is not clear.
 
Your attempts to shift focus are pathetic.

He was not supended for the jewelry or "burglary tool" which, as you point out, was just a screwdriver. Being tardy, writing some stupid shit on your locker and a baggie that may or may not have had marijuana in it is not "thuggish" but rather pretty common juvenile behavior. That word is used by racist to describe his behavior.

Zimmerman, who was arrested and charged with battery of a police officer and had domestic abuse issues seems to have a more troubled past. But then beating your wife is probably common in your area.

The claim is that Trayvon committed a battery on Zimmerman (assault is a threat). But it does seem provoked and who began the struggle is not clear.

I'm not attempting to shift focus; but instead am trying to keep you on point, which seems to be a problem for you.

Are you assuming that Zimmerman was convicted of both of the charges that were made; because otherwise it's just a strawman?

You seem to have decided to give Martin a pass on his behavior; because he's Black and that would be racism on your part.

Would you care to provide something that would support your declaration that it's "pretty common juvenile behavior"?

Please explain how the "battery" was provoked, when the dispatcher report shows that Zimmerman was no longer in contact with Martin; until Martin confronted and then assaulted him?
 
I'm not attempting to shift focus; but instead am trying to keep you on point, which seems to be a problem for you.

Are you assuming that Zimmerman was convicted of both of the charges that were made; because otherwise it's just a strawman?

You seem to have decided to give Martin a pass on his behavior; because he's Black and that would be racism on your part.

Would you care to provide something that would support your declaration that it's "pretty common juvenile behavior"?

Please explain how the "battery" was provoked, when the dispatcher report shows that Zimmerman was no longer in contact with Martin; until Martin confronted and then assaulted him?

I have not strayed from the point. I did not say he was convicted and it is in no way a strawman. I was not making any claims about anyone else's argument.

Give him a pass on what behavior? The school stuff or on what you imagined he did? The school stuff is trivial and it is not thuggish behavior.

The dispatchers transcript does not show that Martin confronted and "assaulted" Zimmerman. It shows that Zimmerman continuously pursued Martin in a way which any reasonable person would expect to provoke a response.
 
I have not strayed from the point. I did not say he was convicted and it is in no way a strawman. I was not making any claims about anyone else's argument.

Give him a pass on what behavior? The school stuff or on what you imagined he did? The school stuff is trivial and it is not thuggish behavior.

The dispatchers transcript does not show that Martin confronted and "assaulted" Zimmerman. It shows that Zimmerman continuously pursued Martin in a way which any reasonable person would expect to provoke a response.
'
And yet, you're quick to assign labels to Zimmerman, without him ever being convicted of anything!
Why is that?
You are dropping the context.

It's completely relevant to whether it is fair to call Trayvon a criminal. There is no basis for it, but we could call Zimmerman one based on his record.
Is it safe to assume that you still feel the 6 Duke Lacrooss players, are still rapists?

I wasn't aware that defacing school property, being found with burglary tools, and in possession of a bag that contained MJ, was trivial!

A person can't claim to be provoked, if they leave and then return.
Once they left; any claim they had to being in fear of anything, has been negated.
 
'
And yet, you're quick to assign labels to Zimmerman, without him ever being convicted of anything!
Why is that?

Is it safe to assume that you still feel the 6 Duke Lacrooss players, are still rapists?

I wasn't aware that defacing school property, being found with burglary tools, and in possession of a bag that contained MJ, was trivial!

A person can't claim to be provoked, if they leave and then return.
Once they left; any claim they had to being in fear of anything, has been negated.

As I already stated the point of calling him a criminal was in response to the ridiculous that Trayvon was. Trayvon was never arrested, charged or even seriously accused, Zimmerman was arrested and charged for battery on a LEO.

This has nothing to do with the Duke Lacrosse case and I never once accused them of rape. That is a strawman.

A screwdriver. Yeah, it's trivial nonsense.

There is no proof that he returned and it does not negate provocation. But somehow you can make this idiotic conclusion while maintaining that Zimmerman was acting in self defense when he stalked and killed Trayvon.
 
As I already stated the point of calling him a criminal was in response to the ridiculous that Trayvon was. Trayvon was never arrested, charged or even seriously accused, Zimmerman was arrested and charged for battery on a LEO.

This has nothing to do with the Duke Lacrosse case and I never once accused them of rape. That is a strawman.

A screwdriver. Yeah, it's trivial nonsense.

There is no proof that he returned and it does not negate provocation. But somehow you can make this idiotic conclusion while maintaining that Zimmerman was acting in self defense when he stalked and killed Trayvon.

You might want to study some law cases, before you pin your hopes on your conclusion that it doesn't negate provocation.
At least you have your "feel good" talking points down.
Maybe someday you'll be able to free yourself, from your racists thinking.
 
You might want to study some law cases, before you pin your hopes on your conclusion that it doesn't negate provocation.
At least you have your "feel good" talking points down.
Maybe someday you'll be able to free yourself, from your racists thinking.

Again retard how is it that your claims (it is not proven) that Trayvon returned shows that he was not provoked but Zimmerman can claim self defends while continuously pursuing his victim even after he fled?
 
Again retard how is it that your claims (it is not proven) that Trayvon returned shows that he was not provoked but Zimmerman can claim self defends while continuously pursuing his victim even after he fled?

Martin left and was no longer able to be seen by Zimmerman, so how is Martin still feeling threatened?
Please show where Zimmerman attacked Martin, which would cause Martin needing to defend himself.
 
Back
Top