No, it's not.
Wow. I gave you too much credit.
I never said that Zimmerman knew about his twitter account.
No, it's not.
Right. Because the "victim" is immediately expunged of any and every wrongdoing.
they do not, but this gloss reveals your bias for sure
Maybe we have different ideas of what that cliche means.
"If it looks su ious..."
THAT'S your proof?
He never claimed Zimmerman knew any specific background on Martin.
The unknown twitter account made him look su ious.
This is your theory.
Maybe we're reading different accounts of this. What did the school records show (or not show) according to reports YOU'VE read?
I did not say so, but it is true that LE seldom charges dead people with new crimes. That would be your job, I guess...
Exactly.
I think you just backed into understanding that.
Bravo!![]()
No. The "look" he was sporting as well as some supposed "su ious behavior" that Zimmerman alludes to was what made him look su ious. And the fact that (again, according to reports I've read) he had had trouble in school (fights, drugs, possible theft) don't necessarily paint the picture of a squeaky-clean teen.
they did not reveal participation in criminal activity. nor do they show that Trayvon Martin "could've been behaving su iously" or "looked su ious" on the day he died, as you suggest. that's quite a stretch.
I'll readily admit that you often use terms that I'm completely unfamiliar with. What does "LE" mean?
And I'm not necessarily attaching any "new crimes" to Trayvon, but merely suggesting that the old ones not be overlooked.
So the twitter account you raved about was completely irrelevant.
Thanks for walking back again, even though you are still trying to assassinate this dead kid's character to what end?
When the crime is framed as armed vigilante kills innocent teen, then perhaps scrutiny of the framework is not completely without merit. I'm not weighing in defense of the gunman at all. But the observation that the questioning might be valid in some sense. No?
I'm prepared to be quite wrong on this as it shivers me ethical timbers a bit.
You are such a tool. You get your ass kicked and you claim victory.
That was YOUR straw man that just went down in flames.
We only have Zimmerman's account (in which he explicitly states that Trayvon looked su ious) and the girlfriend's. I highly doubt either account is without some bias, but that's all I've got to go off of as far as evidence at or near th scene...that is, until the eyewitnesses show up.
So, I'm left to piece things together outside of it, as are you. Not once have I definitively stated that Trayvon was acting in a manner in which preventative action may've been required. You, on the other hand, seem to offer no such room for doubt.
Oooh he was a black guy in a hoodie. Very very criminal.![]()
Zimmerman knew NOTHING of the guy to be su ious of him.
Trayvon Martin's non-existent criminal record is not relevant to his manner of death, no matter how badly you want him to be guilty of something ...anything...
"troubles at school"
"looking the part"
"acting the part"
Not at all. The social networking sights shed light on his drug use and school fights.
I said he didn't realize it. Of course it never made any sense.
Lo and behold, he completely abandoned the twitter account angle he so breathlessly pimped only a few posts earlier.Somehow you think that's getting my ass kicked. You just became SA210.
law enforcementI'll readily admit that you often use terms that I'm completely unfamiliar with. What does "LE" mean?
It's a strawman to act like anyone is saying "that act" is illegal. It's not illegal to pursue, but it makes claiming self defense against the person you're pursuing a lot harder to claim.
I've already addressed that.
Try and keep up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)