HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Duer 157099 » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2

Duer 157099

Profile Information

Member since: Fri Nov 12, 2004, 11:54 AM
Number of posts: 17,742

Journal Archives

More armchair speculation: When Zimmerman claimed that Martin said "You're gonna die tonight MF'er"

I'd bet that it was actually Zimmerman who said that, and the reason he told the cops that TM said it was 1) to give a reason for why he felt threatened, but more importantly 2) because just in case any witness overheard that comment. It sounds like something GZ would say, not something an unarmed kid would say.

GZ said to TM "You're gonna die tonight MF'er!" and then told the police that TM had said it. Because by that point he knew there were some witnesses who heard something going on, and he had to quickly explain away that comment.

Just speculation.

Is there any evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman in any way tried to fight off Martin?

His hands were as smooth as a baby's bottom, not a scratch. And he only started to yell for help after a witness came outside to see what was happening.

I think GZ knew exactly what he was doing and knew he had his ace in the hole, his gun, and that if he waited just long enough, he could whip it out and kill that "punk".

Otherwise, I cannot explain why there is no evidence of him trying to defend himself, at all. Well, aside from using lethal force.

I think GZ instigated it, pushed it to the point of confrontation, then let TM go at him (from TM's perspective, in his own self defense), and then used this to justify killing him.

ETA: this would also explain why he claimed he would be happy if videotape of the incident came forth. He was behaving as though a video *was* capturing it, making sure that it appeared that TM attacked him out of the blue and that he was the victim.

If I'm on the Zimmerman trial jury

then what I heard Zimmerman say today just made up my mind for me. In addition to everything else, this man admitted during the Hannity interview, an interview that he knew would be seen and heard far and wide, that he has absolutely no regrets about how the whole thing went down, and he would not change a thing.

So I'm thinking: that means if I'm a juror and I let him go free, it is almost a certainty that the very next opportunity he gets where he is confronted in any way, out comes his weapon and he does exactly the same thing. By his own words, he would NOT change a thing. The ony conclusion is that he's perfectly willing to repeat it.

As a juror, I'm sorry dude, but you've sealed your own fate with your own a) actions and b) words.

He's probably lucky I'm not a juror, but I'm hopeful that the actual jurors are similarly astute.

If Zimmerman claims he wasn't "profiling" TM...

as he told Det. Sorvino, in response to the question: If he were white, would you have done the same thing?

Is that a bald faced lie? I mean, of course it is, but here, let me prove it:

The recent house break-ins in the neighborhood was being done by... whom? Far as I've heard, it was young black males.

So, he was on the lookout for young black males.

Yet, when he's asked point-blank if he'd have done the same if the kid had been white, he claims yes.


Regardless of whether it was motivated by racism or by profiling based on recent crime history in the vicinity, CLEARLY he profiled.

So, he lied, flat out lied, in that interview.


"Out, damn'd spot! Out, I say!"

Why do those W paintings suddenly bring to mind this scene from Macbeth, I wonder???

What is it she does now? Look how she rubs her hands.

It is an accustom'd action with her, to seem thus
washing her hands. I have known her continue in this a quarter of
an hour.

Lady Macbeth:
Yet here's a spot.

Hark, she speaks. I will set down what comes from her, to
satisfy my remembrance the more strongly.

Lady Macbeth:
Out, damn'd spot! out, I say!—One; two: why, then
'tis time to do't.—Hell is murky.—Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and
afeard? What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our
pow'r to accompt?—Yet who would have thought the old man to
have had so much blood in him?

Why aren't terrorism laws being used on Zimmerman?

There are certainly segments of our society who feel terrorized and threatened by the actions of Zimmerman.

People who have contributed money to Zimmerman, and have perhaps aided his flight out of the country, might also be considered to have aided and abetted him. Accessories?

Isn't this the sort of thing we have all those terrorism laws for? Or is it just for Muslim terrorists?
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2