[quote]countingbeans wrote:
lol. Just lol.
Does the mindset and behavior pattern of a typically “gangbanger” really need to be explained to anyone older than 7?..d the local choir boy. [/quote]
Don’t flatter yourself. That wasn’t the point I was trying to convey.
You’ve said this: ‘‘If Martin was repping a set, it shows a pattern of behavior typical of …while justifying Zimmerman confronting him in the first place.’’
What are the pattern of behaviour typical of people who do such things? What are they? Tell me. You said those patterns justified Zimmbitch in confronting Trayvon. What are those patterns you speak of? What behaviour are you referring to? Wearing a hood and walking a certain way proves you belong to a gang now? Does it mean that people, including whites, who dress that way are thugs?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but during his call to the dispatcher, that fat bastard never mentioned he thought Trayvon belonged to a gang. He saw a black young kid, with a hood on and followed him. Your statement above gives me the impression, Zimcunt knew Trayvon was a ‘‘gangbanger’’ beforehand, and, that the kid was doing something illegal prior being stalked and confronted by the fat bastard.
On the night in question Trayvon was NOT engaging in anything illegal. He was walking home. Zimmerman had no right pursuing him. Zimmerman instigated the entire confrontation and now Trayvon’s blood is on his hands.
Zimcunt racially profiled Trayvon. Period.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I have said more than once, Zimmerman getting out of the car was poor judgment. However, he, you and I have every right to speak to anyone on the street we wish for whatever reason we wish. [/quote]
Lol.
Way to divert from the original fact that Zimcunt got out of his car and stalked an unarmed kid.
Oh yeah, I get ya. We all have the right to talk to people we’ve been stalking blocks after blocks.
Creep.
[quote]darkninjaa wrote:
So Zimmerman was right to confront Trayvon, even though he was asked not to follow him and stay in his car? He was right to confront Trayvon because the kid has a hood on and, walked a certain way, which to some people, means ‘‘trouble’’, right? [/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I never said any of those things, but nice try. [/quote]
Thank you 
It’s called having a conversation and counter arguing. You insinuated, that Trayvon’s ‘‘demeanour’’, ‘‘pattern, behaviour etc…’’ justified Zimcunt confronting him. You talked about being a ‘‘gangbanger.’’ Therefore, based on your statement, wearing a hood and having a certain swag is the perfect reason to be confronted by some trigger happy bitch.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I don’t know. She has lied about enough, where there is more than enough reasonable doubt that she is full of shit now, and, if I was on the jury, I would largely be leaning towards her testimony helping create reasonable doubt for the defense. [/quote]
And as I said before, CB, what makes a believable witness is up to the jury.
[quote]countingbeans wrote
LOL. Not only does this statement contradict itself, it isn’t even true. Her initial statement to police had people saying different things than he trail testimony, and I don’t believe she could hear grass in the initial statement, whatever that sounds like. [/quote]
LOL.
The same could be said about Zimmercunt statement.
That cunt has lied at every step. He was ‘‘afraid’’ but stated he was following Trayvon --even though the dispatcher told him not to? He had a gun but was screaming for help? His head was bashed against concrete. EMT said he was complaining of injuries to his head after being continuously ‘‘bashed’’ into the pavement. Yet witnesses saw Zimmerman standing over Trayvon with no fucking dizziness.
He had no contusion, concussion, brain damage not feared. He was aware enough to speak to police for hours. Damn! Fuck! What a great guy!! Shall we call him Mr Glass?
[quote]countingbeans wrote
Correct. A proven liar, who calls white people “crackers” has stated as such. Pardon me while I am suspect of her statements. [/quote]
Crackers: name of some kind of biscuit.
Crackers, according to the Merriam dictionary: usually disparaging: a poor, usually Southern white; capitalized: a native or resident of Florida or Georgia – used as a nickname.
Meh, I guess the C word has been used by blacks to: tie a white person up and whip them blood dry; make them feel inferior to blacks; deny a white person a seat at a lunch counter; systematically deny whites the right to vote; Deny a white person a seat near the front of a bus; crack the skulls of peaceful white protesters marching for equality; burn white families alive while dressed in white robes and pointy hats; blow up a church and kill four little white girls. Lynch whites for centuries…
Do I need to go on?.. but yeah, some blacks use that word to insult a whites. But does it bear the grievous, historical freight of the N word? Not even fucking close.
But, hey, if Rachel using that word, makes her the ultimate ‘‘racist’’ and, since she is Trayvon’s friend, then coolio! By all means, you and the jury must discount her testimony.
[quote]countingbeans wrote
Correct. Cook’s account of the situation sure does help out Zimmerman as well. [/quote]
Yeap. And, let’s not forget Selma Mora’s who witnessed Zimmerman on top of Trayvon! You could see that fat bastard was about to piss his pants behind that desk as she testifies against him
haha