[quote]Waittz wrote:
The rest of your post is fucking ridiculous. I am sure Black people being lynched in the 60’s really is just as bad as 6 Million Jews murdered over various means in the 40’s. [/quote]
Ah really?
Well, next time don’t use words such as ‘‘far worse’’ to compare plights. [/quote]
Yes, slavery and massive genocide is ‘far worse’ than slavery and minor genocide in my humblest of opinions. Also you can say DN out then come right back in. [/quote]
Oh…
So you’re telling me the number of blacks being killed throughout three centuries (number, you probably are not even aware) is just… minor genocide, Uh?
Wow.
Gotcha. You’re so so so special.
Oh, yeah, I know, I’m doing the in and out thing at the moment.
But I really gotta go this time. Time to go push some weight. The iron game’s calling.
As I said, in my first post, what did you expect from her? To be a top scholar?
[/quote]
No one expected her to be a top scholar. At least no one I know of. But holy hell - If I’m the prosecution, I’m going to do my best to work with my star witness and present her as intelligible at the very least.
Logical fallacy much? [/quote]
Yeah, change her into someone she ain’t so the defence can break her apart a little more.
She was REAL, she was Raw, and yeap, she was messy. But guess what? She stuck to her story, and that the defence couldn’t even trip her for that.
And what the fuck am I still doing here???
For fuck’s sake!!
DN OUT!!
[/quote]
Her ‘story’ was lost in a forest of illiterate mumbling. Hard to tell what she was sticking to - unless you are a mindless cheerleader.
It doesn’t make a bit of difference if she stuck to HER story. What matters is if her story still resonates with the jurors after the defense tears it apart when the prosecution rests.
[/quote]
I did say in one of my posts that, it will be up to the jury to make their mind up regarding her account.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
What about Martian’s character? [/quote]
Oh shit!! I forgot. Trayvon Martin is the one on trial. Not Zimmercunt![/quote]
So, because he is isn’t the one on trail, his role in the altercation and his character is moot?
How does that make any logical sense what-so-ever?
Using your logic, someone could break into my house and try and rape my wife, and if my wife shoots him, her character, her intent, her actions and her words are the only things that needs to be examined.
I was simply point out that yes, underage drinking is in fact illegal. I didn’t judge anyone based on it. Don’t jump to conclusions. I was only pointing out how silly that statement of yours was.
[quote]SickSex6 wrote:
After seeing the type of ghetto ass girl he would involve himself with i cant help but believe he was the same way…
I wouldnt doubt Martin attacked first
This Rachel bitch just ruined the whole thing for the Martins
[/quote]
Are you serious with that shit, brotha?
English is not even her first language, come the fuck on!
She wasn’t born in Hollywood hills. She’s from the hood, where people are not given access to healthy food, education, other resources. How did you really expect her to behave? Like a scholar? Blame the prosecution for not preping her properly beforehand, but do not blame her for ‘‘fucking it’’ up. Actually, it was fucking awesome she was herself instead of reciting a script.
It’s incredible that so many people are forgetting about the MAIN reason why Rachel was even on the stand. Fuck how she spoke and how nervous she was. A young unarmed man was killed by a fucking armed racist pig who specifically sought to cause harm. But no, let’s not focus on that, let’s focus on her look, her speech, her attitude on the stand.
This is yet another diversion by the media and the defence to put her character on the line as opposed to questioning the character of the person who took Trayvon’s life.
You need to stay focused, man. Stay focused.
Rachel never wavered in her testimony and her account coincides with the cumulative narrative that the other witnesses have testified to. No, she didn’t fuck it up for the Martins.
She held it together and didn’t let the defence trip her up, no matter how much that fucker tried.
The way the social media is tearing her apart, is exactly the reason why some people are unwilling to testify.
Fucking hell.
[/quote]
… in the end good will be evil and evil will be good.
And dumb fucks that thought they were cool not cramming late night in school will be put up on a pedestal by other dumb fucks.
When she was smoking weed at night, the kid who sat next to her in school was cramming his lessons for tests the next day. and then had a 45 minutes bus ride back to his white neighborhood.
90% of whites don’t want to be forced to ride a bus 45 minutes to school just because liberals think who you sit next to is more important than educational material.
Funny how as a people, the jews never complained or demanded special treatment for our historical plight, which can be easily argued was far worse, instead we rose up and took over the banks and hollywood. Go figure. [/quote]
And who is complaining here? About what? Has this thread been created so a bunch of white posters spout their inner resentment/ dislike toward blacks?
People are seeking justice for the murder of an innocent unarmed young man. This is all what they are asking. I thought this thread was about the trial? Not about blacks asking for special treatment or reparation for, excuse me, a plight that was far worse than the jews.
Blacks were still being lynched in America in the 60s. I’m sure you’d know that, wouldn’t you? Do you know foetuses were ripped out their mothers’ stomachs during lynching? Women raped and the babies resulting from it, sold? men lynched for just looking at someone a certain way? Whole families burnt alive? A plight less worse than your people? Lol. Bitch, please.
As Big K insinuated, this thread has been created as race bait. I hope you fuckers mention the name of other posters as well as mine when you call me race baiter. There’s only one rule for you lot, I see.
[/quote]
Dark Ninja you are the biggest black apologist that I have met, period.
According to you anything a black reads that contradicts their being a victim is LABELED RACE BAIT.
You don’t get to decide what is offensive. Society as a whole decides that.
You seem to believe the rope and lynching was invented especially for blacks.
Do some reading in world history. Death by hanging was the method of capital punishment in countries all over the world, from the beginning of civilization. Lynch mobs did not originate in Montgomery, Alabama. Lynching of whites and any criminal on the western frontier was a common occurrence and had nothing to with race.
How many blacks do you think were lynched?
There have been more white women raped and murdered by black men in the last thirty years than all the black lynchings in American history. Period. You don’t get that do you.
You are blind and refuse the slightest questioning of information given to you.
I can pick out thousands of black on white crimes from state police statistics that are available to anyone requesting their states annual crime rates. They are quantified by county, gender but more importantly by RACE. My state had 0.015% white rape on black victim if that gives you any idea about how often white men wish to rape black women.
c-dog you’re putting way too much importance on race. Race in and of itself doesn’t matter for anything. Well it matters for some minor physiological skeletal traits and such, but on the whole it’s pretty uninteresting. What you’re really talking about is poorer people tending to commit crimes against richer people.
The comedy of this page is the verbal ass kicking of a fat ignorant 19 yr old and the free pass given to the educated lawyers that placed her on a world stage as a Top witness.
But it is cool because race has no part in this conversation
[quote]four60 wrote:
The comedy of this page is the verbal ass kicking of a fat ignorant 19 yr old and the free pass given to the educated lawyers that placed her on a world stage as a Top witness.
[/quote]
I’m not so sure that the prosecution could have envisioned just how un-prepared she was and still put her on the stand. I assume she was in much better condition when they were coaching her. I’m sure she is very nervous, very agitated, and taking cross examination personal which will fluster anyone.
That said, if she mentioned the “wet grass” and people were okay with her saying that, it is on them for letting her take the stand. In the live leak video posted she contradicted herself on things she had said moments before, so I’m not sure where people are getting the “she stuck to her story” part. She has been shown to have lied more than once, she leaves, very much, reasonable doubt.
At this point, it seems putting her on the stand wasn’t the best idea.
Funny how as a people, the jews never complained or demanded special treatment for our historical plight, which can be easily argued was far worse, instead we rose up and took over the banks and hollywood. Go figure. [/quote]
And who is complaining here? About what? Has this thread been created so a bunch of white posters spout their inner resentment/ dislike toward blacks?
People are seeking justice for the murder of an innocent unarmed young man. This is all what they are asking. I thought this thread was about the trial? Not about blacks asking for special treatment or reparation for, excuse me, a plight that was far worse than the jews.
Blacks were still being lynched in America in the 60s. I’m sure you’d know that, wouldn’t you? Do you know foetuses were ripped out their mothers’ stomachs during lynching? Women raped and the babies resulting from it, sold? men lynched for just looking at someone a certain way? Whole families burnt alive? A plight less worse than your people? Lol. Bitch, please.
As Big K insinuated, this thread has been created as race bait. I hope you fuckers mention the name of other posters as well as mine when you call me race baiter. There’s only one rule for you lot, I see.
[/quote]
Dark Ninja you are the biggest black apologist that I have met, period.
According to you anything a black reads that contradicts their being a victim is LABELED RACE BAIT.
You don’t get to decide what is offensive. Society as a whole decides that.
You seem to believe the rope and lynching was invented especially for blacks.
Do some reading in world history. Death by hanging was the method of capital punishment in countries all over the world, from the beginning of civilization. Lynch mobs did not originate in Montgomery, Alabama. Lynching of whites and any criminal on the western frontier was a common occurrence and had nothing to with race.
How many blacks do you think were lynched?
There have been more white women raped and murdered by black men in the last thirty years than all the black lynchings in American history. Period. You don’t get that do you.
You are blind and refuse the slightest questioning of information given to you.
I can pick out thousands of black on white crimes from state police statistics that are available to anyone requesting their states annual crime rates. They are quantified by county, gender but more importantly by RACE. My state had 0.015% white rape on black victim if that gives you any idea about how often white men wish to rape black women. [/quote]
Cdog, where did you get the statistics on the rapeing/murdering versus hanging? Not saying I do not beleive it, I do actually, just curious of its sourcing. thanks
[quote]four60 wrote:
The comedy of this page is the verbal ass kicking of a fat ignorant 19 yr old and the free pass given to the educated lawyers that placed her on a world stage as a Top witness.
[/quote]
I’m not so sure that the prosecution could have envisioned just how un-prepared she was and still put her on the stand. I assume she was in much better condition when they were coaching her. I’m sure she is very nervous, very agitated, and taking cross examination personal which will fluster anyone.
That said, if she mentioned the “wet grass” and people were okay with her saying that, it is on them for letting her take the stand. In the live leak video posted she contradicted herself on things she had said moments before, so I’m not sure where people are getting the “she stuck to her story” part. She has been shown to have lied more than once, she leaves, very much, reasonable doubt.
At this point, it seems putting her on the stand wasn’t the best idea. [/quote]
Come on Beans!!! We are not trial lawyers who do this for a living but it would have taken you 10 minutes of conversation with this chick to go running to the judge and change this to a Manslaughter charge. No way in hell would you OR I risk a case on this chicks testimony.
Now having saI’d that he food in that part of Florida must be magnificent. Zimmerman look like he has ate twice his weight in cheeseburgers.
[quote]four60 wrote:
The comedy of this page is the verbal ass kicking of a fat ignorant 19 yr old and the free pass given to the educated lawyers that placed her on a world stage as a Top witness.
[/quote]
I’m not so sure that the prosecution could have envisioned just how un-prepared she was and still put her on the stand. I assume she was in much better condition when they were coaching her. I’m sure she is very nervous, very agitated, and taking cross examination personal which will fluster anyone.
That said, if she mentioned the “wet grass” and people were okay with her saying that, it is on them for letting her take the stand. In the live leak video posted she contradicted herself on things she had said moments before, so I’m not sure where people are getting the “she stuck to her story” part. She has been shown to have lied more than once, she leaves, very much, reasonable doubt.
At this point, it seems putting her on the stand wasn’t the best idea. [/quote]
Come on Beans!!! We are not trial lawyers who do this for a living but it would have taken you 10 minutes of conversation with this chick to go running to the judge and change this to a Manslaughter charge. No way in hell would you OR I risk a case on this chicks testimony.
Now having saI’d that he food in that part of Florida must be magnificent. Zimmerman look like he has ate twice his weight in cheeseburgers.
[/quote]
I would like to think that yes, without question, if she was my “star witness” I would be hesitant to push a murder charge, or even put her on the stand.
I heard the “wet grass” comments live and was flabbergasted. And then she kept saying it, and thought to myself, oh boy…
So, because he is isn’t the one on trail, his role in the altercation and his character is moot?
How does that make any logical sense what-so-ever?
Using your logic, someone could break into my house and try and rape my wife, and if my wife shoots him, her character, her intent, her actions and her words are the only things that needs to be examined.
[/quote]
Oh, but I agree with you. I totally agree with you. It is Trayvon Martin’s trial after all. And his character has been on trial and, will be on trial till his murderer walks.
Fuck Zimmercunt’s history of violence.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I was simply point out that yes, underage drinking is in fact illegal. I didn’t judge anyone based on it. Don’t jump to conclusions. I was only pointing out how silly that statement of yours was.[/quote]
Yeah. Such a silly statement.
You knew what I was getting at, you knew the point I was making, but, eh, you wanted to play a game of words and semantics, with that air of intelligence and superiority you believe you possess over others.
I don’t give a fuck it my statement sounded silly to you. I’ll stick by it.
Furthermore, since you want to take that word ‘‘crime’’ so literally, please let’s see the police reports of under-age drinkers arrested for posting their booze on FB or on Instagram. I’m so sure all those unruly, drunkards, sex-addict teens on social media, have at least a criminal record attached to their names.
Rachel posting her nails prior to going to court is fucking irrelevant to the case. It is not a CRIME to post nails on social media.
So, because he is isn’t the one on trail, his role in the altercation and his character is moot?
How does that make any logical sense what-so-ever?
Using your logic, someone could break into my house and try and rape my wife, and if my wife shoots him, her character, her intent, her actions and her words are the only things that needs to be examined.
[/quote]
Oh, but I agree with you. I totally agree with you. It is Trayvon Martin’s trial after all. And his character has been on trial and, will be on trial till his murderer walks.
Fuck Zimmercunt’s history of violence.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I was simply point out that yes, underage drinking is in fact illegal. I didn’t judge anyone based on it. Don’t jump to conclusions. I was only pointing out how silly that statement of yours was.[/quote]
Yeah. Such a silly statement.
You knew what I was getting at, you knew the point I was making, but, eh, you wanted to play a game of words and semantics, with that air of intelligence and superiority you believe you possess over others.
I don’t give a fuck it my statement sounded silly to you. I’ll stick by it.
Furthermore, since you want to take that word ‘‘crime’’ so literally, please let’s see the police reports of under-age drinkers arrested for posting their booze on FB or on Instagram. I’m so sure all those unruly, drunkards, sex-addict teens on social media, have at least a criminal record attached to their names.
Rachel posting her nails prior to going to court is fucking irrelevant to the case. It is not a CRIME to post nails on social media.[/quote]
Just couldnt stay away? Would love to see your response to ConsertiveDog’s last post.
So, because he is isn’t the one on trail, his role in the altercation and his character is moot?
How does that make any logical sense what-so-ever?
Using your logic, someone could break into my house and try and rape my wife, and if my wife shoots him, her character, her intent, her actions and her words are the only things that needs to be examined.
[/quote]
Oh, but I agree with you. I totally agree with you. It is Trayvon Martin’s trial after all. And his character has been on trial and, will be on trial till his murderer walks.
Fuck Zimmercunt’s history of violence.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I was simply point out that yes, underage drinking is in fact illegal. I didn’t judge anyone based on it. Don’t jump to conclusions. I was only pointing out how silly that statement of yours was.[/quote]
Yeah. Such a silly statement.
You knew what I was getting at, you knew the point I was making, but, eh, you wanted to play a game of words and semantics, with that air of intelligence and superiority you believe you possess over others.
I don’t give a fuck it my statement sounded silly to you. I’ll stick by it.
Furthermore, since you want to take that word ‘‘crime’’ so literally, please let’s see the police reports of under-age drinkers arrested for posting their booze on FB or on Instagram. I’m so sure all those unruly, drunkards, sex-addict teens on social media, have at least a criminal record attached to their names.
Rachel posting her nails prior to going to court is fucking irrelevant to the case. It is not a CRIME to post nails on social media.[/quote]
She’s indirectly a character witness, she reflects that he’s from a typically shitty black social clique that is racist and has a street thug mentality. Count rock rightly picked up on this.
Thats certainly how it plays out in court whether you like it or not.
So, because he is isn’t the one on trail, his role in the altercation and his character is moot?
How does that make any logical sense what-so-ever?
Using your logic, someone could break into my house and try and rape my wife, and if my wife shoots him, her character, her intent, her actions and her words are the only things that needs to be examined.
[/quote]
Oh, but I agree with you. I totally agree with you. It is Trayvon Martin’s trial after all. And his character has been on trial and, will be on trial till his murderer walks.
Fuck Zimmercunt’s history of violence.[/quote]
Both of the people involved have a past, and both of those pasts are relevant, mainly because we only have one “first hand” account of what happened.
The fact is, who actually escalated the confrontation into a physical altercation determines the charge Zimmerman should face. If Zimmerman laid the first hand on Martian, he should be punished with a massive amount of jail time. If Martian had hit Zimmerman first, Zimmerman should not do jail time, in light of the John Good testimony today. So of course the character of the parties involved matter. It is the only way we can judge Zimmerman’s account as reasonable or not.
Had Martian been an Eagle Scout and enrolled at Harvard, I would have a hard time believing he would have hit Zimmerman first. Had MArtian been in trouble for assault the week before, and portrayed himself as a “bad ass mother fucker” I don’t think it is at all unreasonable he reacted to Zimmerman’s words with physical violence.
So again, using your logic, someone could break into my house and try and rape my wife, and if my wife shoots him, her character, her intent, her actions and her words are the only things that needs to be examined.
What violence was in Zimmerman’s past?
[quote]
Yeah. Such a silly statement. [/quote]
It was, reread it. It is actually laugh out loud funny.
No, I don’t really. This woman is a state witness in one of the more high profile cases in a long time. She is going to come under the utmost of scrutiny, and anyone that didn’t think her posts about stupid teenage shit were going to come under fire wasn’t thinking through.
Again, I wasn’t judging her on her behavior, but I understand why it has been highlighted. However you seem to think these posts she made are somehow supposed to be looked at differently because she is 19. I disagree. Stupid is stupid, age is irrelevant. And yes, posting about drinking illegally and smoking illegal drugs is stupid. I don’t excuse poor choices because a young person made them. I expect that person to make better choices going forward like I would expect anyone. (That said, I don’t think posting stupid things makes her a bad person or even stupid. She just made bad choices.)
I do judge her on the “wet grass” comment though.
Nice conjecture, and a touch of ad hominem
Okay. Still is funny.
lol
No, as far as I’m aware it isn’t. Not sure where I ever insinuated it was.
