And having a twitter account called NO_LIMIT_N!GGAYeah, mine was just deriding your apparent glee at his death for having a grill.
Sorry.
()
Of course, the actual CRIMINAL record Zimmerman has doesn't seem to bother fpoonsie
So grill = criminal.
Nowhere in my posts am I saying this kid deserved to die. I simply argued that one might not fault the self-appointed neighborhood watch zealot for his su ions being roused.
Whatever happened after that is still widely up in the air.
And tweets he could have ever read? Yeah, that's rousing.
And having a twitter account called NO_LIMIT_N!GGAYeah, mine was just deriding your apparent glee at his death for having a grill.
Sorry.
(
Of course, the actual CRIMINAL record Zimmerman has doesn't seem to bother fpoonsie
What's been found? Didjoo already post something and I missed it?
The mother also wants a trademark. I thought this was a little odd. thought it has nothing to do with the actual case.
http://www.witn.com/news/nationalwor...144386985.html
Chump apparently has one of those new apple computers that can tell what other posters are thinking. With my old PC I have to just rely on the written word to draw my conclusions.
Nowhere in my posts am I saying this kid deserved to die. I simply argued that one might not fault the self-appointed neighborhood watch zealot for his su ions being roused.
Whatever happened after that is still widely up in the air.
He is constantly asserting what we are thinking/feeling when there is absolutely nothing in our posts to justify his assertions.
Thats just the way Bouchump rolls.
Why are you calling him a zealot if you don't think he should be faulted for his su ions being roused?
Nowhere in my posts am I saying this kid deserved to die. I simply argued that one might not fault the self-appointed neighborhood watch zealot for his su ions being roused.
Whatever happened after that is still widely up in the air.
Obviously Charles Bronson was monitoring all the twitter accounts of black youths with grills in the county.
It's rousing.
that's just what we do when people get killed: sift the evidence to determine whether or not the victim's records are sufficient to sustain a new investigation into unrelated crimes perpetrated by the victim.
Zimmerman I'm sure also knew that the complete stranger walking down his street was caught with jewelry in his backpack at school.So grill = criminal.
And tweets he could have ever read? Yeah, that's rousing.
Is that because Florida police are known for trying to cover up hispanic crimes?
Sorry, CC. You're being pretty transparent in this thread.
Lol pussy
Nowhere in my posts am I saying this kid deserved to die. I simply argued that one might not fault the self-appointed neighborhood watch zealot for his su ions being roused.
Whatever happened after that is still widely up in the air.
my bad. dunno about the school records, hence my previous question about it...
We also drug test the victim....however we don't drug test the shooter.
"If it walks like a duck..."So grill = criminal.
Never said that. I merely stated that if one person's history needs to be examined after a heated confrontation that lead to a death, it's not too much to ask to take a closer look at the other individual involved.Of course, the actual CRIMINAL record Zimmerman has doesn't seem to bother fpoonsie
Because he's not without some blame as well. Never argued otherwise.
More like they are trying to cover up their botched police procedures at a crime scene.
Was this in response to my query, WH?
I'll keep that in mind next time I visit Florida.
Wait.
What do you mean by that?
Elaborate.
Is having no criminal history "walking like a duck..."
What exactly are you referring to by saying that?
After doing that, the best you could find on "the other individual involved" was him having a grill, a twitter account called NO_LIMIT_ , and an incident where he was caught with some jewelry that didn't lead to any criminal charges.
Sounds like a real menace to society.
dp
yah. no need to post it the fifth time.
Or Zimmerman may argue that he stopped following Martin and was returing to his car when Martin assaulted him. Zimmerman might also argue that the only eye witness can testify that he saw Martin on top of him beating him to death and that in his fear for his life, he reached for his gun and pulled the trigger.
You have a solid point that Zimmerman should not have left his car to pursue Martin. But that act, in and of itself is not illegal. That act, does not show premeditation that he intended to kill Martin.
Zimmerman acknowledges on the phone that Marin had run and that he had lost him. He said that he would meet the inbound police. That is where the tape ends and all we have is a witness and then the shooter whose stories seem to confirm that the shooting was self-defense and therefore unless the police had probable cause to believe that the shooting was not self-defense, they must not arrest him.
"If he don't dress white, you must indict."
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions