State pushes to keep Trayvon Martin's past out of George Zimmerman trial

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

wait a second. he didn't know zimmerman was armed until he got shot. until then he was beating the hell out of a smaller man.

??? Z had 40 pounds on M, easily. Z was a bouncer. M was a few inches taller.

This is true.

Edited May 14, 2013 by The Patriot

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I have an idea, since folks are saying there is a difference between following him and chasing him. What would this look like if TM was a woman?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I have an idea, since folks are saying there is a difference between following him and chasing him. What would this look like if TM was a woman?

And GZ was a man?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

And GZ was a man?

Yep, would all these "reasons" be used if she felt threatened by a strange man "following her" for no reason other than she looked suspicious.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Yep, would all these "reasons" be used if she felt threatened by a strange man "following her" for no reason other than she looked suspicious.

And she turned around and punched him in the nose, just before he fell on his butt and drilled a hole in her chest?

Edited May 15, 2013 by The Patriot

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I have an idea, since folks are saying there is a difference between following him and chasing him.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

And she turned around and punched him in the nose, just before fell on his butt and drilled a hole in her chest?

Let's say she hid and attacked him. And the outcome was the same. Would we argue and say she was the aggressor?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Let's say she hid and attacked him. And the outcome was the same. Would we argue and say she was the aggressor?

I don't know. Women are crazy like that.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Let's say she hid and attacked him. And the outcome was the same. Would we argue and say she was the aggressor?

The gun nuts most certainly would. They support other gun nuts no matter what.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

? In my answer I'm assuming the firearm is concealed. If he is brandishing it then the situation reverses.

Well, we do know for sure that TM wasn't brandishing a firearm. No doubt about that, is there?

Zimmerman may or may not have brandished his. We'll never really know because the only other person that could tell us is now dead. Convenient to the accused, isn't it?

Edited May 15, 2013 by Mr. Big Dog

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Correct. I was referring to zimmerman.

Zimmerman killed the only person that could tell us whether he did or did not brandish his firearm.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I guess my thought process is different. Because I can't see the difference in following and chasing in this situation.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

He shot an unarmed teen. There was a time when they would have skipped the trial, and just swung Z from a lamppost, or the nearest tree.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

While this is true, its not evidence that he did. In fact under the circumstances its unlikely.

No, Zimmerman took care of the evidence. He fixed it. It's six feet under now. Convenient, ain't it?

[Ban Hammer 13,577]

I guess my thought process is different. Because I can't see the difference in following and chasing in this situation.

chasing (at least to me) implies running. following can be done at a walk.

No, Zimmerman took care of the evidence. He fixed it. It's six feet under now. Convenient, ain't it?

there's something called forensic evidence. that's not buried.