Ok mngundog, I'm going to type this real slooooow! Once the altercation started what avenue(s) did Zimmerman have to defend himself? Was he supposed to get beaten to death or did he ever have the right to defend his own well-being? Please stay on point and answer!
Coach, he's from MN. Those long, cold winters are tough.
Mngundog, what's wrong you can't take a joke! I read very well but thanks for the tip. So as you stated he has no right to self-defense and has to take the beating. You're right, huntinman! Shouldn't mngundog be thankful for global warming?
Last edited by coachmo; 07-02-2013 at 03:49 PM.
HPL, there's something wrong with your keyboard. The dash key is random, and your caps lock gets stuck on the letters V, O, and N.
Last edited by luvalab; 07-02-2013 at 04:14 PM.
willing slave to the whims of
Kerrybrooks Magical Atticus MH
Coastalight Kiowa Ravenhawk MH
There are several points that have come out now that we have access to Zimmerman's initial statements, the. The media made a BIG, BIG deal out of asking why George pressed the "pursuit" after the dispatcher "told him not to". In fact the dispatcher actually said: "we don't need you to do that", which was much less emphatic than the way the media painted the statement, and much more like what some lady I might be helping with her luggage might say ("oh, you don't need to do that hon", which I would ignore and go on and help with the luggage). Now that we have access to Zimmerman's statements, we know that he said that after the dispatcher said they didn't need him to follow Tray-VON, he actually DID break off and begin returning to his truck. The policeman that I have heard testify said on direct questioning that he believed George and did NOT believe that he was lying. Regarding small changes in George's narrative, he also said that slight changes in someone's telling of events did not indicate lying but simply that people weren't robots and that it was not just common, but normal for there to be such slight changes when people recounted events multiple times.
If George actually did turn around and head back to his truck and if Tray-VON's destination was basically in the opposite direction, and if Tray-VON was between George and Tray-VON's destination and not between George and George's truck, (did you get that?) then Tray-VON had to intentionally get around in front of George (who was peacefully retreating) in order to confront him.
George's narrative is in direct opposition from the way that the media (and Sharpton and Jackson, et. al.) depicted the encounter. Problem is that the media wasn't there. George was. The cops apparently basically believe George's narrative (from the beginning). I see no reason to call him a liar beyond a reasonable doubt. Somebody hit George in the nose. George was on his back in the wet grass for some reason. Something caused George's head to strike the pavement repeatedly causing cuts and bruises. All these pieces of physical evidence seem to jive with George's recounting of events. The neighbor who was an eye witness corroborates this view of the actual event.
Last edited by HPL; 07-02-2013 at 04:44 PM.
Any doctrine that weakens personal responsibility for judgment and for action helps create the attitudes that welcome and support the totalitarian state.
Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for 'tis better to be alone than in bad company.
Gig'em Aggies!! BTCO'77HOO t.u.!!
Not only all of that... The officer also testified that George seemed to genuinely want or hope that there was video of the incident to show what actually happened. He did not seem afraid of the truth being known.