The dispatcher told him that they didn't need him to follow Martin... yet he continued to do so. Pretty simple to back it up if you're willing to use your brain.
edit: oh you're another one of the many, many, many doombug clones, aren't you?
Trayvon Martin - Analysis of Known Evidence
- Thread starter Johnfromokc
- Start date
The dispatcher told him that they didn't need him to follow Martin... yet he continued to do so. Pretty simple to back it up if you're willing to use your brain.
edit: oh you're another one of the many, many, many doombug clones, aren't you?
I'll be unsubscribing from this thread, so don't feel a need to respond...but the fact that he was still in contact w/ Martin in order to shoot him kinda proves that he didn't stop following him, IMO. :dunno
JR33
Banned
Wow, that is a lie. No proof whatsoever to back that up.
JR33
Banned
"yet he continued to do so" where is the proof of that? There is none.
Flat denial is not a good debating technique.
We actually do not know that at all. There is every possibility that he didn't follow Trayvon after the operator told him not to, to which Zimmerman agreed and even said he lost Trayvon and returned to his SUV.
Which part??? That he shot him??? Even he says he did. I'll be honest...I'm not following the story b/c I'm so fucking sick of hearing about it that I literally DO NOT CARE that this kid is dead anymore. I don't care if Zimmerman rots in prison for the rest of his life and I don't care if a statue is erected in his honor. I...do...not...care.
Which one of your personalities would like to respond now???
Oh shit...*unsubscribes again* :24:
lmfao!!!! :24:
Logic dictates that he continued on based on where the altercation took place and where Zimmerman stated he was at the beginning of the call. But I forgot, logic isn't the strong suit of the aptly named zimmerbots.
harley
Banned
It is easy to look at the diagram of the events and see that GZ stopped following him.
It's very easy to look at the diagram of the events and cross-reference it with the audio playback and see that Zimmerman had to have continued to follow him after the dispatcher told him that they didn't need him to. Listen for things like, oh I don't know... a vehicle door closing maybe. Use your brain and open your mind just a little bit and maybe, just maybe, you'll be able to think outside of the zimmerbot box.
harley
Banned
Alan Dershowitz calls that type of evidence in this case similiar to ink blot tests. It other words it is interpreted however someone wants to see it. The eyewitness accounts, wounds to Zimmerman etc... are the real evidence and was left out of the prosecution's affidavit. Dershowitz, Harvard law professor, says Angela Corey should be removed from the case.
No, they confirm that an altercation took place... they don't confirm Zimmerman's claim that Trayvon Martin preemptively attacked him. I'm so very sorry to have to rain on your parade.
It also doesn't show that Zimmerman caused an altercation.
His actions directly led to it. He chose to follow Martin... had he stayed in his vehicle, none of this would have happened. Pretty simple.
JR33
Banned
Zimmerman had as much right to walk through his neighborhood as Martin. Truth is neither one was breaking any laws. It may have been stupid to get out of his SUV but not illegal. What is illegal is assaulting someone. Zimmerman made the claim he was attacked and was defending himself. In Florida the burden of proof is on the prosecution to show otherwise. What proof does the prosecution have? According to the lead investigator, under oath, they have no proof.
Except that he was following the kid and his actions led to the eventual altercation... no mater who initiated it. Cause and fucking effect. But again, that's something that you don't seem to be able to understand.
Wouldnt matter if he followed him or not...there is no proof he did by the way.
But lets assume he did..doesnt give martin the right to try to kill the watchman