Jul 15 - George Zimmerman Juror B37 Hates Media, Called Trayvon ‘A Boy of Color’

most viewed right now
 75
The internet reacts to people getting finessed by the mother of the viral bull..
149 comments
@wild'ish
most viewed right now
 63
Image(s) inside 19 yo Becky with a phatty 🍑
52 comments
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 59
Whoo Kid says 50 Cent used to be out here beatin up random drug dealers
44 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 53
NFL NFL Network suspends Marshall Faulk, Heath Evans, Ike Taylor due to sexual..
188 comments
@sports

section   (0 bx goons and 1 bystanders) Share this on Twitter   Share this on Facebook
 

Props Slaps
 4 years ago '04        #241
justinjones 307 heat pts307
space
avatar space
space
$49,369 | Props total: 6383 6383
everybody on their Jack McCoy sh!t
 4 years ago '11        #242
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 TheMindOf said:
n*ggas acting like they can only feel a certain type of way about an event if they were an adult when it happened (to hide their hypocrisy )


So I guess you never felt anything about the injustice in the murders of MLK, Malcolm X, Huey Newton, or Fred Hampton because you weren't alive or an adult when those happened either?




n*gga just admit that you're a hypocrite and keep it moving



There are other discussions to be had
Yes, there are other discussions to be had like the paypal link for the state's prosecution so we all can donate?



If you want to label me a hypocrite, fine. It's better than being labeled a known idiot.

And to answer your question, no I don't feel angry about the deaths you listed. I find it sad that I'm 50 years removed from some of those events and people are getting k!lled because of their color.
 4 years ago '10        #243
TheMindOf 21 heat pts21
space
avatar space
space
$27,749 | Props total: 16554 16554
 Kadillac87 said:
Yes, there are other discussions to be had like the paypal link for the state's prosecution so we all can donate?



If you want to label me a hypocrite, fine. It's better than being labeled a known idiot.

And to answer your question, no I don't feel angry about the deaths you listed. I find it sad that I'm 50 years removed from some of those events and people are getting k!lled because of their color.
Long as you know you're a hypocrite, thats all I care about


You invested a lot in this case emotionally and you lost. I know it hurts..

One day the pain in your heart will go away


Oh and for the record I aint seen nobody laugh that prosecution donation sh*t except for you, and your little yes man Carlton..

Not a good look, seeing as you try that joke every time I make you eat your words (which is A LOT )

You trying too hard.. The laughs and co-signs you looking so hard for seem to elude you.. Maybe you should try another route.


 4 years ago '11        #244
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 TheMindOf said:
Long as you know you're a hypocrite, thats all I care about


You invested a lot in this case emotionally and you lost. I know it hurts..

One day the pain in your heart will go away


Oh and for the record I aint seen nobody laugh that prosecution donation sh*t except for you, and your little yes man Carlton..

Not a good look, seeing as you try that joke every time I make you eat your words (which is A LOT )

You trying too hard.. The laughs and co-signs you looking so hard for seem to elude you.. Maybe you should try another route.


I invested a lot in this case emotionally?

You invested a lot in the state's prosecution fund apparently


I keep bringing it up just to remind you how stupid you are. You actually tried to argue that the case failed because Black people didn't come out of pocket enough.



Thomas doesn't care how dumb himself look trying to be a cynic. Now that's the joke I find funny. Actually tried to say language from the Magna Carta applies to America.

 4 years ago '10        #245
TheMindOf 21 heat pts21
space
avatar space
space
$27,749 | Props total: 16554 16554
 Kadillac87 said:
I invested a lot in this case emotionally?

You invested a lot in the state's prosecution fund apparently


I keep bringing it up just to remind you how stupid you are. You actually tried to argue that the case failed because Black people didn't come out of pocket enough.



Thomas doesn't care how dumb himself look trying to be a cynic. Now that's the joke I find funny. Actually tried to say language from the Magna Carta applies to America.

What?

You so mad, you aint even speaking English right now



Maybe you should find that paypal post and quote it so everyone can see how "stupid" I am.




Go right ahead.. I'd love for everyone to see the context.

Plus it, would make you look really smart too.

(you'll also notice I haven't edited it either)
 4 years ago '11        #246
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 TheMindOf said:



Maybe you should find that paypal post and quote it so everyone can see how "stupid" I am.



Go right ahead.. I'd love for everyone to see the context.

Plus it, would make you look really smart too.

(you'll also notice I haven't edited it either)
 TheMindOf said:
Also..

Let this be a lesson to n*ggas.

White folks raised $450 thousand for Zimmerman and his defense.

If black folks had taken all the money they spent on Skittles and Ice Tea (so they could take pictures for instagram and facebook) and put it towards the Trayvon Martin Fund, they probably could have raised well over a million dollars for his Legal team.

But no, n*ggas gotta make it about themselves. Gotta buy Skittles, Hoodies, and Iced Tea to line the pockets of Fortune 500 companies. And so they can take pictures for the internet, to show off, and show that they're down with the "cause". Meanwhile the Martin Fund only raised 100k in 2 years.

Maybe he wouldn't have had those sh*t lawyers, if n*ggas was more about this situation, and less about themselves.
 Kadillac87 said:
Hey idiot, the prosecution is handled by the state. No amount of money raised for Trayvon would be able to replace the State's prosecution. It was Zimmerman V. Florida. Not Zimmerman V. Trayvon you idiot.
 neworleansavior said:
Trayvon was represented by the state though ...........................
 banga said:
raise money for a state prosecutor?

moron.
 TheMindOf said:
Not all of your lawyers are provided by the state. You know you can bring in some of your own right?

Ben Crump wasn't provided by the state. He's just a lawyer that decided to do some work for the family, pro bono. He's just a sh*t lawyer/advisor tho.

They could have hired a whole team of lawyers to advise the state attorneys, if they had the bread.

But you knew that right?
 r.burgundy said:
u cant buy state prosecutors dumb a.ss
 Msirae said:


I can't tell if this is serious or not.
 Kadillac87 said:
Ben Crump was brought in to get the case to trial and he did his job. The Martins had lawyers to represent their family, not to prosecute Zimmerman because that's the state's job. The fact that you think you can hire your own prosecutors in a state's case is laughable. The prosecutor represent the interests of the State.

 TheMindOf said:
So n*ggas is just gonna ignore the truth in the post after that?

Okay.. You n*ggas are right.

Once you're being defended by the state, you cant hire any lawyers or advisors of your own


Because Ben Crump, Natalie Jackson and Daryl Parks aren't lawyer from outside the state's provided lawyers. They're just a magical people who appeared out of nowhere


And also, if thats the only problem yall have with that post, you n*ggas lost
 Bravo Golf said:
As other posters already mentioned, you can't donate to the state's legal fund. However, I'm sure there will be a black man on trial for something in the near future...


One of the reasons why blacks who k!ll whites face a higher conviction rate than non-blacks who k!ll blacks is that in most cases, those non-blacks can afford better than defense lawyers than the average black defendant. I don't have the data in front of me at the moment, but I believe it was found that most of the black men behind bars right now had state-appointed attorneys. The George Zimmerman trial just showed how competent state lawyers are...
 Kadillac87 said:
Again dumb n*gga, Trayvon wasn't being defended by the state. Zimmerman was being prosecuted by the State. Trayvon wasn't on trial idiot. How many times did you see Ben Crump, Natalie Jackson, etc speak in court? They were there to represent the interest of Martin's family aka get a fair trial. They don't advise the state on how to prosecute. When being a smart dumb n*gga goes wrong.


Your dumbass even tried arguing it even though everyone told you how wrong you were.
 4 years ago '10        #247
TheMindOf 21 heat pts21
space
avatar space
space
$27,749 | Props total: 16554 16554
Thanks.. Didnt feel like finding it myself.

Everything in that post was accurate..

And here's a picture of his "sh*t Lawyers" I was referring to


[pic - click to view]




[pic - click to view]




You know.. The Martin family civil attorneys who insisted that the state not make this case about race, and avoid it, making it the elephant in the room. The dudes who pretty much came up with the strategy that the state ran with and lost.


Either way. Thanks.. Now n*ggas can see how not serious that post is... Even though you been clinging onto it for 3 days now as your saving grace every time I son you

I still stand by it 100%
 4 years ago '11        #248
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 TheMindOf said:
Thanks.. Didnt feel like finding it myself.

Everything in that post was accurate..

And here's a picture of his "sh*t Lawyers" I was referring to


[pic - click to view]




[pic - click to view]




You know.. The Martin family civil attorneys who insisted that the state not make this case about race, and avoid it, making it the elephant in the room. The dudes who pretty much came up with the strategy that the state ran with and lost.


Either way. Thanks.. Now n*ggas can see how not serious that post is... Even though you been clinging onto it for 3 days now as your saving grace every time I son you

I still stand by it 100%
Again, dumb n*gga. These lawyers represent the Martin Family, they are not criminal lawyers. They don't dictate how evidence is collected nor how the prosecution prosecute. They were such sh*tty lawyers that they did their job by getting the case to go to trial. Clearly, everybody else thought your comment was asinine. Just give it up. Go back to trying to find the phrase "jury of your peers" in the US constitution.
 4 years ago '07        #249
Ham Rove 3510 heat pts3510
space
avatar space
space
$55,204 | Props total: 19846 19846
 Kadillac87 said:
Again, dumb n*gga. These lawyers represent the Martin Family, they are not criminal lawyers. They don't dictate how evidence is collected nor how the prosecution prosecute. They were such sh*tty lawyers that they did their job by getting the case to go to trial. Clearly, everybody else thought your comment was asinine. Just give it up. Go back to trying to find the phrase "jury of your peers" in the US constitution.
 4 years ago '04        #250
Dramatick 
space
avatar space
space
$844 | Props total: 5 5
 Bravo Golf said:
The same criminal justice system that acquitted OJ Simpson in 1995 is the same criminal justice system that acquitted George Zimmerman in 2013. That's not deflecting the conversation; that's pointing to the hypocrisy of those who cheered when OJ got off but riot because Zimmerman got off. The same goes for the other side. At least Trayvon's parents took the verdict like real G's. Make this a teachable moment and move on.
And OJ Simpson was acquitted because the LAPD planted evidence.


The glove didn't fit....
 4 years ago '12        #251
Bravo Golf 11 heat pts11
space
space
space
$4,451 | Props total: 3004 3004
 snippet said:
Can you explain yourself more here? Because the way I'm reading it makes you sound pretty silly, and I figure I must not get your true meaning.

Because right now what you're saying sounds to me like you're unsure why there are things like laws that say employers can't discriminate based on race, or religion, or age. Someone would be outraged that an employer wouldn't hire them based on their race, but you would apparently counter that the person should be mad that they didn't get a job in general. Which would be a nonsensical position to take.

So perhaps you can explain what you're trying to say.
Fine. I'll elaborate.

George Zimmerman, Hispanic, shoots and k!lls Trayvon Martin, black, on February 26, 2012. He is on the scene near the body when police arrive. He admits to shooting Trayvon but in self-defense. He has visible injuries consisted with the story he told police. They question him, review evidence at the scene, and decide not to charge him, not because they believe he was innocent but because there wasn't enough evidence to disprove his account of events.

In the court of law, it's not what happened; it's what can be proven.

Nevertheless, black folks everywhere were upset about the perceived injustice. A Hispanic man k!lls an unarmed black teenager and walks away.

Aaron Hernandez, Hispanic, (presumably) shoots and k!lls Olin Lloyd, black, on June 17, 2013. Video evidence surfaces showing Hernandez with Lloyd the night he was murdered. The rental vehicle Lloyd was driving that night was registered to Hernandez. Hernandez destroys his cell phone and home surveillance system, two very suspicious and peculiar acts considering what just happened. All the evidence in the world points to him either knowing who did it and not telling or being directly involved, yet he's not arrested for 11 days. In fact, he was only going to be charged with obstruction of justice initially.

No outrage from the black community, and this is a nearly a year and half after Trayvon.

What are the differences? Trayvon's murder is considered to be racially motivated; Lloyd's murder is not. In both cases, both were unarmed and shot by Hispanic, not black, men.

So, what does that tell the average person? Black people only care when k!llings are racially motivated. They look the other way when a black man is k!lled for other reasons. Just look at the lack of outrage shown to black-on-black homicides in this country.

My question is, why isn't there outrage for every loss of black life? Isn't murder just as tragic regardless of the motive?


Last edited by Bravo Golf; 07-16-2013 at 08:20 PM..
 4 years ago '12        #252
Bravo Golf 11 heat pts11
space
space
space
$4,451 | Props total: 3004 3004
 Kadillac87 said:
What evidence have I been arguing against? The only thing I have been arguing against is dumb people like you and Thomas who try to find every reason to say race didn't play a factor.
There are multiple factors. I never said race NEVER played a factor. Anyone can see that race played a factor in Trayvon being singled out as looking suspicious. I never once denied that.

Where I'm downplaying the race factor is in Zimmerman's acquittal. This is where I say look at the evidence against him. Look at the prosecutions burden of proof. What evidence did the prosecution present that shows that Zimmerman have every intention of k!lling Trayvon that night?

I'll answer that question for you. None.

People then try to reach and point to the racial make up of the jury. The racial makeup of the jury is irrelevant to the fact that the prosecution put up a weak case. In order for Zimmerman to be guilty of murder, the state had to prove that Zimmerman was the instigator. True, he exited his vehicle. True, he followed Trayvon. But in doing those two things, he didn't break any laws. And no evidence exists to show that he confronted Trayvon. It's very possible to exit a vehicle, follow a person, lose them, then walk back. Zimmerman says it is then that Trayvon confronted him. There is no evidence to debunk that theory.

Zimmerman claims that Trayvon sucker punched him. Again, let's review the evidence. Zimmerman has a bloody nose. Trayvon has a slight bruise on his left hand. Seems to be consistent with Person A throwing a punch and Person B receiving it.

Zimmerman claims that Trayvon was bashing his head into the cement. Again, let's review the evidence. Zimmerman has lacerations in the back of his head and swelling around his temple. A forensic examiner testifies that those injuries are consistent with someone getting their head bashed in.

So far, the prosecution has presented nothing to dispute this version of events.

Zimmerman claims he called for help. 911 calls record a person calling for help. Zimmerman claims he then shot Trayvon because no help came and Trayvon didn't show any signs of slowing down his attack. Evidence shows that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman when he was shot. Again, who is the aggressor? The person on top, or the person on the bottom?

This is why Zimmerman wasn't going to get convicted of murder 2. I saw this a year ago when the facts started to surface.

But what about manslaughter?

Well, manslaughter seems likely because it can be argued that Zimmerman's action, specifically when he initially exited the vehicle, led to the confrontation regardless of who threw the first punch. This led to a f!ght which led to Trayvon being shot.

However, in the state of Florida and several others, it is lawful to k!ll someone who is beating your a.ss. Because of this, Zimmerman walks. Any reasonable jury considering the same evidence and testimony and being briefed on the specific laws in the case would come to the same verdict.
 4 years ago '12        #253
Bravo Golf 11 heat pts11
space
space
space
$4,451 | Props total: 3004 3004
 Dramatick said:
And OJ Simpson was acquitted because the LAPD planted evidence.


The glove didn't fit....
Doesn't mean he didn't commit the murders.

The planted evidence and the glove are examples of reasonable doubt.

The defense did their job.

Notice how OJ was found liable in a later civil suit?

In any case, OJ could come out tomorrow and admit at a press conference that he did the murders. It doesn't matter because double jeopardy prevents him from being retried because of his initial acquittal. He could even write a book confessing to the murders. Oh, wait...


Last edited by Bravo Golf; 07-16-2013 at 08:24 PM..
 4 years ago '11        #254
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 Bravo Golf said:
There are multiple factors. I never said race NEVER played a factor. Anyone can see that race played a factor in Trayvon being singled out as looking suspicious. I never once denied that.

Where I'm downplaying the race factor is in Zimmerman's acquittal. This is where I say look at the evidence against him. Look at the prosecutions burden of proof. What evidence did the prosecution present that shows that Zimmerman have every intention of k!lling Trayvon that night?

I'll answer that question for you. None.

People then try to reach and point to the racial make up of the jury. The racial makeup of the jury is irrelevant to the fact that the prosecution put up a weak case. In order for Zimmerman to be guilty of murder, the state had to prove that Zimmerman was the instigator. True, he exited his vehicle. True, he followed Trayvon. But in doing those two things, he didn't break any laws. And no evidence exists to show that he confronted Trayvon. It's very possible to exit a vehicle, follow a person, lose them, then walk back. Zimmerman says it is then that Trayvon confronted him. There is no evidence to debunk that theory.

Zimmerman claims that Trayvon sucker punched him. Again, let's review the evidence. Zimmerman has a bloody nose. Trayvon has a slight bruise on his left hand. Seems to be consistent with Person A throwing a punch and Person B receiving it.

Zimmerman claims that Trayvon was bashing his head into the cement. Again, let's review the evidence. Zimmerman has lacerations in the back of his head and swelling around his temple. A forensic examiner testifies that those injuries are consistent with someone getting their head bashed in.

So far, the prosecution has presented nothing to dispute this version of events.

Zimmerman claims he called for help. 911 calls record a person calling for help. Zimmerman claims he then shot Trayvon because no help came and Trayvon didn't show any signs of slowing down his attack. Evidence shows that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman when he was shot. Again, who is the aggressor? The person on top, or the person on the bottom?

This is why Zimmerman wasn't going to get convicted of murder 2. I saw this a year ago when the facts started to surface.

But what about manslaughter?

Well, manslaughter seems likely because it can be argued that Zimmerman's action, specifically when he initially exited the vehicle, led to the confrontation regardless of who threw the first punch. This led to a f!ght which led to Trayvon being shot.

However, in the state of Florida and several others, it is lawful to k!ll someone who is beating your a.ss. Because of this, Zimmerman walks. Any reasonable jury considering the same evidence and testimony and being briefed on the specific laws in the case would come to the same verdict.
Just like the white jury, you're automatically seeing Zimmerman's version as more credible. Just because someone has a bloody nose doesn't mean they were suckered punch. You brought in into the imagery painted by the defense as Trayvon as a thug and automatically a.ssumed he was the aggressor in everything.

I'm pretty sure you found parts of Rachel's testimony credible. But why not the part where she said she could hear Trayvon being pushed and saying "get off"? It doesn't fit with your preconceived notion that Trayvon was a thug so you rejected it.

You keep saying based on the evidence, you can tell Trayvon was the aggressor. No, based on your preconceptions of Trayvon, you a.ssumed Trayvon was the aggressor. There's no evidence that says a person can't be the aggressor and get his a.ss kicked.

That why I laugh when you and others say the jury's race didn't play a part. You, as a black man, already brought in into the thug image. What you think white people going to think?

You can't come up with any evidence that Zimmerman didn't throw the first blow, but yet you're claiming you are looking at the evidence that does not exist.

Never once did you hear me say the prosecution didn't have a weak case. I think they failed miserably. They couldn't even bring up race because the judge wouldn't allow them to say racial profiling. I've said it should have never been a murder 2 charge and a manslaughter case all the way. They overcharged Zimmerman and didn't do a good job of creating a narrative. Even with their weak case, they have a split jury after the first vote. This case came down to perceptions.

Rachel's testimony of Zimmerman being the aggressor was corroborated by another witness who said she heard two people arguing, a child and an adult with the adult having the more aggressive tone. But these wasn't seen as credible by you or the jury because it didn't fit the preconceived notion of Trayvon.

It's ok to say I believe this is what happened. But you and others try to act like you're looking at some evidence that doesn't exist.


Last edited by Kadillac87; 07-16-2013 at 08:46 PM..
 4 years ago '12        #255
Bravo Golf 11 heat pts11
space
space
space
$4,451 | Props total: 3004 3004
 Kadillac87 said:
Just like the white jury, you're automatically seeing Zimmerman's version as more credible. Just because someone has a bloody nose doesn't mean they were suckered punch. You brought in into the imagery painted by the defense as Trayvon as a thug and automatically a.ssumed he was the aggressor in everything.

I'm pretty sure you found parts of Rachel's testimony credible. But why not the part where she said she could hear Trayvon being pushed and saying "get off"? It doesn't fit with your preconceived notion that Trayvon was a thug so you rejected it.

You keep saying based on the evidence, you can tell Trayvon was the aggressor. No, based on your preconceptions of Trayvon, you a.ssumed Trayvon was the aggressor. There's no evidence that says a person can't be the aggressor and get his a.ss kicked.

That why I laugh when you and others say the jury's race didn't play a part. You, as a black man, already brought in into the thug image. What you think white people going to think?

You can't come up with any evidence that Zimmerman didn't throw the first blow, but yet you're claiming you are looking at the evidence that does not exist.

Never once did you hear me say the prosecution didn't have a weak case. I think they failed miserably. They couldn't even bring up race because the judge wouldn't allow them to say racial profiling. I've said it should have never been a murder 2 charge and a manslaughter case all the way. They overcharged Zimmerman and didn't do a good job of creating a narrative. Even with their weak case, they have a split jury after the first vote. This case came down to perceptions.

Rachel's testimony of Zimmerman being the aggressor was corroborated by another witness who said she heard two people arguing, a child and an adult with the adult having the more aggressive tone. But these wasn't seen as credible by you or the jury because it didn't fit the preconceived notion of Trayvon.

It's ok to say I believe this is what happened. But you and others try to act like you're looking at some evidence that doesn't exist.
Okay. For the sake of argument, let's say Zimmerman was the aggressor and started the physical confrontation. Who won the f!ght (before the shooting)?

Now, let's look at Stand Your Ground. It states that a person can use deadly force to stop an attack. Regardless of who threw the first punch, it was obvious that Trayvon gained the upperhand. However, if Trayvon wasn't slowing up his attack, then SYG says that you can use deadly force to prevent serious bodily injury. It doesn't matter whether serious bodily injury is possible. What matters is what the defendant perceives to be happening.

Like I've stated before, the issue in this case is the Stand Your Ground law. If you want to get mad and protest, f!ght to get that law repealed so something like this can't happen in the future.
 4 years ago '12        #256
Bravo Golf 11 heat pts11
space
space
space
$4,451 | Props total: 3004 3004
Here's a situation where a person tried to use Stand Your Ground and failed:


[video - click to view]


His case failed because the video clearly showed he wasn't in any real danger.

However, if a person is straddling you, punching you and slamming your head into the ground, you can say that you felt you were in real danger.

Trayvon could have popped Zimmerman that night and be well within the law.

Here's another Stand Your Ground case, again taking place in the months following Trayvon Martin's death.


[video - click to view]


[video - click to view]


In this case, the shooter, a black man, was not charged in shooting an unarmed, mentally handicapped man at a Taco Bell. Black people were silent about this case. I wonder why...


Last edited by Bravo Golf; 07-16-2013 at 09:05 PM..
 4 years ago '11        #257
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 Bravo Golf said:
Okay. For the sake of argument, let's say Zimmerman was the aggressor and started the physical confrontation. Who won the f!ght (before the shooting)?

Now, let's look at Stand Your Ground. It states that a person can use deadly force to stop an attack. Regardless of who threw the first punch, it was obvious that Trayvon gained the upperhand. However, if Trayvon wasn't slowing up his attack, then SYG says that you can use deadly force to prevent serious bodily injury. It doesn't matter whether serious bodily injury is possible. What matters is what the defendant perceives to be happening.

Like I've stated before, the issue in this case is the Stand Your Ground law. If you want to get mad and protest, f!ght to get that law repealed so something like this can't happen in the future.
If Zimmerman throws the first blow, that is aggravated a.ssault. He can't claim self defense then. Under Florida law, if you discharge a firearm during a forcible felony, it's automatic 10 years. So yes, who the aggressor was matters a lot. Why do you think his defense team kept making a point that following someone isn't illegal?
 4 years ago '12        #258
Bravo Golf 11 heat pts11
space
space
space
$4,451 | Props total: 3004 3004
 Kadillac87 said:
If Zimmerman throws the first blow, that is aggravated a.ssault. He can't claim self defense then. Under Florida law, if you discharge a firearm during a forcible felony, it's automatic 10 years. So yes, who the aggressor was matters a lot. Why do you think his defense team kept making a point that following someone isn't illegal?
Because the state couldn't prove that Zimmerman threw the first blow.

And how does a bloody nose and a bruise knuckle not prove that one person punched the other?

Like I said, it's not what happened; it's what can be proven.

The defense could prove their theory that Trayvon was the aggressor because of the evidence. There's Zimmerman's bloody nose. There's Trayvon's knuckle.

And I agree with you regarding Rachel's testimony. I believe her testimony was damaging to the state's case. Even if she was 100 percent telling the truth -- for the record, I believe her testimony -- her inability to communicate effectively hampered the jury's ability to understand her testimony. She did a much better job when she appeared on Piers Morgan, but at that point it's too late. It is the state's job to prepare each witness, and they failed to prepare her. She didn't want to be there, and it was obvious.
 4 years ago '11        #259
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 Bravo Golf said:
Because the state couldn't prove that Zimmerman threw the first blow.

And how does a bloody nose and a bruise knuckle not prove that one person punched the other?

Like I said, it's not what happened; it's what can be proven.

The defense could prove their theory that Trayvon was the aggressor because of the evidence. There's Zimmerman's bloody nose. There's Trayvon's knuckle.

And I agree with you regarding Rachel's testimony. I believe her testimony was damaging to the state's case. Even if she was 100 percent telling the truth -- for the record, I believe her testimony -- her inability to communicate effectively hampered the jury's ability to understand her testimony. She did a much better job when she appeared on Piers Morgan, but at that point it's too late. It is the state's job to prepare each witness, and they failed to prepare her. She didn't want to be there, and it was obvious.
Yes the State couldn't prove Zimmerman threw the first blow. Nobody saw it, but you are claiming that you know Trayvon was aggressor based on some type of concrete evidence. The only evidence you have was there was a f!ght which nobody is disputing. Then you're using your perceptions of Trayvon and trying to pass that off as evidence that he was the aggressor.

So again, what evidence, do you have that Trayvon was the initial aggressor? Why don't you believe Rachel and others who said Zimmerman was the initial aggressor if you're apparently looking at the "evidence"?

 4 years ago '05        #260
Panopticon 42 heat pts42
space
avatar space
space
$23,924 | Props total: 11287 11287
 Bravo Golf said:
Fine. I'll elaborate.
-

No outrage from the black community, and this is a nearly a year and half after Trayvon.

What are the differences? Trayvon's murder is considered to be racially motivated; Lloyd's murder is not. In both cases, both were unarmed and shot by Hispanic, not black, men.

So, what does that tell the average person? Black people only care when k!llings are racially motivated. They look the other way when a black man is k!lled for other reasons. Just look at the lack of outrage shown to black-on-black homicides in this country.

My question is, why isn't there outrage for every loss of black life? Isn't murder just as tragic regardless of the motive?
Okay, so you are saying what it seemed you were saying. I'm not the best teacher, but I'll try to explain what is confusing you. Sure people are upset over loss of life. But the outrage comes over disparate treatment in society.

What's the hallmark of America? That it's supposed to be a melting pot. A place where everyone has a fair shot, regardless of race, color or creed (or religion, or age, or disability, etc).

So when people feel like the society they live in has a systematic bias against them, whether it's for reasons of race, or religion, or s3xual orientation - that is an outrage because those are supposed to be constitutionally protected rights.

This is going to sound dismissive, so I apologize, but learn or relearn the history of civil rights in America. Black people were not allowed to shop at the same stores white people shopped at. Couldn't drink from the same fountains white people drank at. They were denied jobs, equal pay, rights like the right to vote, and so on.

All because of the color of their skin. Our skin. So over time enough people fought and died so that it was known and codified in law that discrimination on the basis of race was illegal. That you could not look at someone's skin color and pre-judge (prejudice) who they were based on that.

Well that's exactly what Zimmerman did. His defense team literally said that in their closing - that Zimmerman saw him and "unfortunately Trayvon 'fit the description'".

You can't have that. You can't have a society where all throughout it you have people getting treated poorly (or preferentially) because of the color of their skin.

That's why people are upset. Understand? That's against the tenets of America. That's why MLK Jr. was so sure eventually black people would be treated as equal citizens (clearly hasn't happened yet). Because written in the founding documents of this country are these principles. Equality of men. Freedom. Get it?
Home      
  
 

 






most viewed right now
 37
Image(s) inside Sweet Colombian....Baddie... IDK nigga she got ass and she pretty. peep
74 comments
2 days ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 21
Is Harlem World a Classic?
173 comments
1 day ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 14
Article inside Kodi addon site TVAddons to stop proactively checking for piracy
24 comments
1 day ago
@tech
most viewed right now
 10
Video inside My experience after record deal (warning)
296 comments
1 day ago
@wild'ish
most viewed right now
 6
50 Cent Says Jay Z Will Fail In Boxing Promotion....and he was right
65 comments
2 days ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 6
audio inside Quavo & Lil Yachty “Ice Tray” (Joe Budden Diss)
75 comments
1 day ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 4
NFL Things got out of control real quick during Sea/Jax game..player almost ju..
95 comments
1 day ago
@sports
most viewed right now
 4
Eminem's First Week numbers for every album ranked
49 comments
1 day ago
@hiphop
back to top
register contact Follow BX @ Twitter Follow BX @ Facebook search BX privacy