Where are the stand your ground gun nuts?

This is going way over your head, but I'll try to dumb it down. This wordy twit made a post that claims Martin said "You are going to die motherfucker". My simple question was this: Was it on tape, meaning where is the corroboration?

The simple answer is, moron, there isn't any indication that was said other than Zimmerman covering his ass. But, this verbose wonder has to cut-and-paste worthless legal citations when a simple acknowledgement would suffice.

Did I use words too big for you to understand?

Then where is the corroboration for all the conclusions you have arrived at?
Where are the recordings to back you up?
 
And the one thing you can not say is that I am wrong on any point in fact or law.

You are happy to stumble in ignorance and emotion and making that flaw well-known seems to be your singular purpose here.



On topic comment, just to make the post more verbose . . . Here are the standard jury instructions for self-defense cases in Florida:

"If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved."​

The question wasn't about law, idiot. What did you not comprehend about the question?
 
Then where is the corroboration for all the conclusions you have arrived at?
Where are the recordings to back you up?

I didn't offer a conclusion on that post, you fucking moron. I asked about the corroboration of Zimmerman's statement. The answer is, cretin, there is no corroboration. Zimmerman's statement was nothing more than heresay. Probably concocted heresay to boot.

Go back to "big bugs, big plants", idiot. It's more on your level.
 
I didn't offer a conclusion on that post, you fucking moron. I asked about the corroboration of Zimmerman's statement. The answer is, cretin, there is no corroboration. Zimmerman's statement was nothing more than heresay. Probably concocted heresay to boot.

Go back to "big bugs, big plants", idiot. It's more on your level.

But you have and the chronology of your posts show you have:

"...Kicked out of school = death penalty..."
 
The question wasn't about law, idiot. What did you not comprehend about the question?

Of course the question was about law.

You want to impart some unstated significance to Zimmerman's quote of Martin.

The only significance that matters is a legal one -- whether the truthfulness of the statement has legal implications for Zimmerman's claim of self-defense.

Since no burden of proof exists for Zimmerman, the lack of corroboration of the statement doesn't matter.
 
Of course the question was about law.

You want to impart some unstated significance to Zimmerman's quote of Martin.

The only significance that matters is a legal one -- whether the truthfulness of the statement has legal implications for Zimmerman's claim of self-defense.

Since no burden of proof exists for Zimmerman, the lack of corroboration of the statement doesn't matter.

In post #127, YOU imparted the significance, not me. I merely asked about the corroborated truth about it. You could not, and still cannot, respond with anything but unending cut-and-paste.
 
Kicked out of school = death penalty. I see your sentiment,

You identify with a Rambo wannabe like that punk Zimmerman. Also evident.

Sad about it? Nope. Just another one of your ignorant interpretations.,Typical failure on your part.

Keep flailing, punktard. It's a source of amusement.

Isn't it ironic that you end your little diatribe accusing me of an ignorant interpretation while you started off with your own ignorant interpretation

I never said kicked out of school = death penalty. I am pointing out that Trayvon was no innocent withering violet.

The world is better off without Trayvon. Zimmerman probably saved lives and property by exterminating the little cockroach.
 
Untrue.
What lead him to his death, is his decision to make wrong choices; for which he paid the ultimate price.

You're conclusion that being Kicked out of school = death penalty would only hold true, if it pertained to way more individuals then Trayvon.

In other words, acting like a thug led to his death.
 
Isn't it ironic that you end your little diatribe accusing me of an ignorant interpretation while you started off with your own ignorant interpretation

I never said kicked out of school = death penalty. I am pointing out that Trayvon was no innocent withering violet.

The world is better off without Trayvon. Zimmerman probably saved lives and property by exterminating the little cockroach.

He saved the taxpayers a lot of money by not having to constantly deal with Trayvon in the legal system throughout his adult life.
 
Isn't it ironic that you end your little diatribe accusing me of an ignorant interpretation while you started off with your own ignorant interpretation

I never said kicked out of school = death penalty. I am pointing out that Trayvon was no innocent withering violet.

The world is better off without Trayvon. Zimmerman probably saved lives and property by exterminating the little cockroach.

Died returning from the store with Skittles and a pop. Yeah, he was out looking for trouble that night. And here we have, the survivor, the object of numerous assault charges and other anger management issues.

Martin died because of a Bronson-wannabe vigilante. And you'll defend that. Why?

Punks of a feather stick together.
 
Died returning from the store with Skittles and a pop. Yeah, he was out looking for trouble that night. And here we have, the survivor, the object of numerous assault charges and other anger management issues.

Martin died because of a Bronson-wannabe vigilante. And you'll defend that. Why?

Punks of a feather stick together.

Were you there? You speak as if you were.

Sounds like thugs of a feather stick together since you defend a thug.
 
Died returning from the store with Skittles and a pop. Yeah, he was out looking for trouble that night. And here we have, the survivor, the object of numerous assault charges and other anger management issues.

Martin died because of a Bronson-wannabe vigilante. And you'll defend that. Why?

Punks of a feather stick together.

Do you have a audio tape that supports your erroneous conclusion?
 
Died returning from the store with Skittles and a pop. Yeah, he was out looking for trouble that night. And here we have, the survivor, the object of numerous assault charges and other anger management issues.

Martin died because of a Bronson-wannabe vigilante. And you'll defend that. Why?

Punks of a feather stick together.

He died because he acted like a thug and got what a thug deserved. That he had Skittles and a pop is irrelevant.
 
Do you have a audio tape that supports your erroneous conclusion?

Look at the dispatch tapes. Zimmerman claims Martin was running away and was told to not follow him. But Bronson needed to ignore that and save the day. I just added that other tidbit about Rambutt's state of mind, too.

"These assholes they always get away."

"Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah
Dispatcher: Ok, we don't need you to do that.
Zimmerman: Ok

As I said, you punks of a feather stick together. Comprende, bitch?
 
Last edited:
Look at the dispatch tapes. Zimmerman claims Martin was running away and was told to not follow him. But Bronson needed to ignore that and save the day. I just added that other tidbit about Rambutt's state of mind, too.

"These assholes they always get away."

"Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah
Dispatcher: Ok, we don't need you to do that.
Zimmerman: Ok

As I said, you punks of a feather stick together. Comprende, bitch?

When you correct your lie about Zimmerman being told TO NOT FOLLOW HIM, we can continue; because he was never told to NOT FOLLOW HIM.
BIATCH

:evilnod:
 
Died returning from the store with Skittles and a pop. Yeah, he was out looking for trouble that night. And here we have, the survivor, the object of numerous assault charges and other anger management issues.

Martin died because of a Bronson-wannabe vigilante. And you'll defend that. Why?

Punks of a feather stick together.

Because Trayvon the thug was asking for it

Wanna learn something? Google what the combination of skittles and Arizona iced t a is used for. Also look at the autops report on Martin. Pay particular close attention to the liver.
 
In post #127, YOU imparted the significance, not me. I merely asked about the corroborated truth about it. You could not, and still cannot, respond with anything but unending cut-and-paste.

Post 127 was just a clarification that the self-defense claim wasn't just about Zimmerman getting his head pounded into the concrete.

If you want to say I'm claiming something is "significant" in post 127 I would say it is my statement:


"None of the 911 transcripts and BS narratives that flow from those tapes matter at that point.

There was no evidence that night nor any presented since, that can refute Zimmerman's account of the altercation which is why Zimmerman was not charged with any crime (until the racist / political shitshow started). "​


Of course all you want to do is ignore the law and focus on is BS that doesn't matter.

That makes you a useless idiot in this discussion.
 
Look at the dispatch tapes.

LOL.

Zimmerman claims Martin was running away and was told to not follow him.

What a dummy you are. Totally consumed with completely wrong beliefs . . .

The dispatcher's comment had no force of law behind it.

Just because I know you so hate when I directly quote sources that prove you wrong here is the Sanford City Manager addressing questions about the case on March 19th, just as the Racist Outrage Machine was getting warmed up:



"If Zimmerman was told not to continue to follow Trayvon, can that be considered in this investigation?

Yes it will; however, the telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman “are you following him”. Zimmerman replied, “yes”. The call taker stated “you don’t need to do that”. The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be required to follow.

Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked by Trayvon."​



Why don't you start ignoring the unimportant and start paying attention to what really matters?

Here, let's read together the City Manager explaining important fact and point in law:




"Why was George Zimmerman not arrested the night of the shooting?

When the Sanford Police Department arrived at the scene of the incident, Mr. Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time was supported by physical evidence and testimony. By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the facts and circumstances they had at the time.

Additionally, when any police officer makes an arrest for any reason, the officer MUST swear and affirm that he/she is making the arrest in good faith and with probable cause. If the arrest is done maliciously and in bad faith, the officer and the City may be held liable."​



Of course we know that a cascade of new incriminating evidence was discovered in the following weeks and it was that new undeniable probable cause that forced the prosecutor to file 2nd degree murder charges against Zimmerman . . . NOT!!!!


Link: Sanford City Manager's Letter
 
Back
Top