Trayvon Martin Trial

Off Topic
541

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:
Either way it does not mean he wanted the kid dead.[/quote]

Right. The facts and circumstances present Zimmerman as a man who’s judgment isn’t very good, or at the very least, isn’t very consistent. But, like you said, that doesn’t make him a murderer, and she shouldn’t be punished as one.

I do not, however, hope he gets off “scott Free”, or whatever the saying is. He acted irresponsible and exhibited enough poor judgment that a lessor charge would have me agreeing with that outcome.

Prosecution really dropped the ball on this one. [/quote]

Oh he will walk and if not then the jury just didn’t like the guy. And If anything he is a living example of what could happen if you decide to play cop. So to everyone who said “he is within his right to walk up and question someone” they need to also consider what could happen if shit goes wrong. We are grown ups. We MUST think like that. We can’t just say fuck it.

542

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:
Either way it does not mean he wanted the kid dead.[/quote]

Right. The facts and circumstances present Zimmerman as a man who’s judgment isn’t very good, or at the very least, isn’t very consistent. But, like you said, that doesn’t make him a murderer, and she shouldn’t be punished as one.

I do not, however, hope he gets off “scott Free”, or whatever the saying is. He acted irresponsible and exhibited enough poor judgment that a lessor charge would have me agreeing with that outcome.

Prosecution really dropped the ball on this one. [/quote]

“scot free”, apparently was a tax and if you avoided it you were said to be scot free. Wikipedia is great

543

[quote]four60 wrote:
So to everyone who said “he is within his right to walk up and question someone” they need to also consider what could happen if shit goes wrong. We are grown ups. We MUST think like that. We can’t just say fuck it. [/quote]

Which is why most people don’t confront random people on the street, and why it has been stated over and over that Zimmerman used poor judgment in doing so.

544

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I have no idea if Zimmerman profiled Martin based on his clothing or gate… All I know is Zimmerman, for whatever reason, thought Martin was suspicious. I’m not aware if Zimmerman claimed he profiled Martin based off of his dress or walk, etc. [/quote]

Oh yeah yeah, I totally agree.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Again, trying to turn a hypothetical into an assertion. For someone so hot about dictionary definitions you’d do yourself a favor to look up “hypothetical” and “logical fallacy”. [/quote]

Oh, I will! I will! I hope you look up ‘‘racist’’ and ‘‘bigot’’ too!!!

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

I have no idea. This has been your assertion for awhile now.

Stating Martin matched the description of suspects involved in crimes in the area prior, is just that, stating that Martin matched the description of suspects involved in crimes. [/quote]

Oh, okay… So let’s ignore the fact that Zimcunt has been pestering the police every time blacks kids wandered into the community. Why only black kids? So only black kids raid homes? What do you call that? Ain’t that racially profiling?

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Funny, because you continue to do it, lol. [/quote]

Yes. I was being sarcastic.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Either you aren’t reading what I write, or are literally making shit up to try and save e-face at this point. [/quote]

Lol. Saving e-face. Lololo. For someone, who is dedicated to ‘‘fighting’’ in the politics forum, I understand, it is fundamental to you that you always save your e-face. I do not care about that. We’re having a debate. If I feel you’ve provided a great counter argument, then I will admit that. I’m not here to win anything or saving e-face. Spare me with that bullshit.

You present a hypothetical scenario, it is up to me to dissect it however I feel like.
You play that game a lot in PWI vs other posters, so please, stop being up and arms and flustered when that happens to you.

But I’ll drop it for real.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Not really no. You’re making up assertions I didn’t make to try and back me into some corner, that isn’t there. [/quote]

Lol. The same shit you do to others. Not nice when it happens to you, uh?

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I have no idea what he looked like. Haven’t seen a video.

I dont’ know if Zimmerman thought he was a thug. All I know is Zimmerman thought he was suspicious and match the description of suspects in crimes in the area prior. [/quote]

Hence you bringing that hypothetical scenario, about set of pattern and behaviour, uh?

Oh shit! I brought it up again!!!

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Eh… I don’t really care whether Martin was a thug or not, all that matters is pattern of behavior. Martin showed a pattern of behavior that included violence. Now this doesn’t mean I 100% instantly believe Zimmerman’s story. But it does, however, make Zimmerman’s account plausible and reasonable, given Martin wasn’t shy about being violent and fighting. [/quote]

Okay.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Okay, paramedics are on file saying his head was bleeding and would need stiches… [/quote]

Ehehehe, I’m sure you’ve seen the pictures, right? Damn, the cuts… or shall I say, the grazes on his skull, definitely looked like life-threatening injuries resulting from repeated head bashing.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I suppose you want him to teleport places? [/quote]

Lol. Way to avoid the fact that he lied. Typical.

This is something I read somewhere. I’ll post the link later, got to hit the gym soon:

There is no way GZ could pull his gun as described. On his back with his holster against his hip, his holster inside his waistband, while being pinned by TM who is supposedly straddling him. This position means TMâ??s legs are blocking access to GZ’s waist area (especially if he wiggles â??downwardâ?? through the straddling legs), as well as the ground and clothing making it impossible to reach and pull a gun. In this position you cannot pull a gun on a wet and rainy night without some evidence on the gun. But the fact is GZ’s elbow is too long to reach his waist since he claimed to be pinning TMâ??s arm while attempting this trick.

Now… who’s lying again?

[quote]coutingbeans wrote:

lol yes, headsets dont’ exist, nor are they easy to miss… lol, just lol. [/quote]

Oh, so Trayvon used headsets now? Where does it say that? Did they find headsets by his corpse? Are you fucking kidding me with this bullshit? LOLOLOL!!!

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

What is the problem here? [/quote]

The problem here is you cannot be using your two hands to bash someone’s head, while at the same time, reaching for the firearm. Did Trayvon have a third arm??

[quote]Countingbeans wrote:
Up to you. [/quote]

Here’s the bonus: Zimmcunt says in his statement to the police that Trayvon covered his mouth and nose with his hand. His statement on the tape: ''I put my hand on his nose…no, no, he put his hand on my nose and said ‘shut up’! ‘’

If Trayvon had covered his mouth and nose he would have Zimmcunt DNA on his hands. Zimcunt DNA was never found on him. Had Trayvon been pummelling and bashing Zimcunt’s head, that fat bastard’s DNA would have been found on his sleeves and in his fingers.

Zimmfat says Trayvon straddled him and pinned his hands with his knees or something but, the police testimony and crime scene photos, as well as photo taken by a neighbour, show Trayvon’s hands were under his body until police moved him to render first aid.

Now, who’s a fucking liar?

[quote]Countinbeans wrote:

Utter bullshit, particularly compared to your posts.

Without referencing your favorite hypothetical, show me where I am anywhere near as biased as you. (Not that the hypothetical is biased, just you have repeatedly purposefully failed to understand it.)
[/quote]

Meh, I don’t need to. As I said before, you’ve been pretty biased since you first post in this thread.

And I’d say it again, if you want to stand for Zimcunt, do it. I’ll be here Trayvon Martin.

[quote] countingbeans wrote:
lol. I guess the paramedics must all be in on the cover-up then? And the cops? And the pictures of his mangled face? [/quote]

See my replies above.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Conjecture
[/quote]

Of course! Of course!

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

It has to do with a similar situation to the hypothetical you refuse to understand.

If Martin doesn’t like white people, and a white person (as far as he can tell at that point) confronts him, it makes a violent reaction a reasonable conclusion. This doesn’t absolutely mean he did react violently, nor that he hates white people. It simply points to a mindset, which coupled with other factors, points to likely scenarios.
[/quote]

Oh shit. All right, all right!! So, I’m walking down the street, I noticed someone following me, then that freak chases me down the streets. I’m supposed to smile at him when he confront me? Really? Oh it’s like saying a woman walking alone at night and noticed a creep following her, she’s supposed to turn around, after being CHASED by that fucking creep, and she should smile and tell him to rape her?? RIGHT??

So according to you, Martin saw a white guy following him and since he hates white people, he was ready for the fight. But shit, let’s not forget he began to run! He ran! Oh, my god! What kind of tough white-hater motherfucker runs away from a fat creep that is stalking you??

Trayvon was fucking scared. Trayvon was not there to fight a white fat guy. He fought when Zimcunt caught up with him and pinned him down!!!

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
rth did you take my statement to that extreme without laughing hysterically as you typed it?[/quote]

Bwahahahaha!! I was actually grinning as I typed this! But so what? Ain’t what you’ve implied? I’m just hypothetically speaking, my dear. You said Martin being racist gives a fairly decent case, so I’m creating hypothetical scenarios based on your statements.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

What the hell are you even talking about anymore. Why are you taking my statements and creating this nonsense? I didn’t say that, imply that, insinuate that or even approach that topic with a 10 foot pole. (That is like 3 meters)

Why can’t you just discuss the case without making up this crazy BS? [/quote]

I am discussing the case CB. Calm down. You make a statement and I analyse it. If you think it is not the way you intended it to come across, then say so. Stop bursting a bubble. It is a civil debate after all, lol.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

A counter point to nothing I said. Counter point implies relevance… [/quote]

Oh, I see.

Where is it that what you say is set in stone and the law of the land? It kills me when people somehow think their opinion should be superior to that of everyone else’s and we must bow down and go along with it as if it’s the gospel because that’s how YOU see/feel about the situation.

Spare me with that bullshit.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Your use of “cunt” every other word cheapens your argument that I’m using a word out of context or improperly.

Try to actually speak like an adult and I’ll entertain the thought of continuing this part of the dialogue. [/quote]

Lol.

I’ve been civil with you all throughout our exchange. I kept my posts pretty tame. The word ‘‘cunt’’ was used with regards to Zimcunt, who I despise for killing and innocent kid. I don’t give a fuck if you feel it cheapens my arguments.

If you have an issue with the way I express myself, then do not address me any more. Stop quoting me and move on.

I understand you have some kind of superiority/elitist complex, but, man, don’t think you can impose it on me, or belittle me, because I don’t conform to your standards. It won’t work on me. You won’t change me. And I won’t change my style to please your ass.

We may as well end the convo right here.

545

[quote]four60 wrote:
That statement actually adds to the chance he was profiling.
[/quote]

  1. Profiling is not illegal for a non-state actor. (A state actor is like a cop or the IRS.) Private citizens can profile all day long. It may be wrong, but so is Justin Beiber, and, sadly, he’s not illegal, either.

  2. Anyone wandering under the eves of houses, seemingly aimlessly, at 4:30 in the AM is fricken suspicious. Yeah, there is an innocent explanation for all this (raining, talking on the phone and not wanting parents to hear, etc., but it still looks funny.)

  3. Also, while we are it is, having a limited description of a thief as “young black male wearing hoody” and then bothering “young black males wearing hoodies” is not profiling, to begin with. “Profiling” is having no suspect then picking out black males because they are “more prone to be criminals.” Here, there was an actual thief breaking into actual houses who was a black male wearing a hoddie.

546

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:
That statement actually adds to the chance he was profiling.
[/quote]

  1. Profiling is not illegal for a non-state actor. (A state actor is like a cop or the IRS.) Private citizens can profile all day long. It may be wrong, but so is Justin Beiber, and, sadly, he’s not illegal, either.

  2. Anyone wandering under the eves of houses, seemingly aimlessly, at 4:30 in the AM is fricken suspicious. Yeah, there is an innocent explanation for all this (raining, talking on the phone and not wanting parents to hear, etc., but it still looks funny.)

  3. Also, while we are it is, having a limited description of a thief as “young black male wearing hoody” and then bothering “young black males wearing hoodies” is not profiling, to begin with. “Profiling” is having no suspect then picking out black males because they are “more prone to be criminals.” Here, there was an actual thief breaking into actual houses who was a black male wearing a hoddie.
    [/quote]

4:30 am??? Not sure where you got that from?

Under Houses??? Not sure about that one either.

Now you could have added my whole statement it was not that large. First I have little care about the legality of what he did. The fact and please tell me if I’m wrong. Zimmermans action caused him to get fucked up and end up killing someone. That is what his decision to profile and act on that decision without any worry of hey I have a gun leaving my car at night walking after someone I think is a bad guy.

I mean I was not asking for definitions but thank you anyway.

547

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:
So to everyone who said “he is within his right to walk up and question someone” they need to also consider what could happen if shit goes wrong. We are grown ups. We MUST think like that. We can’t just say fuck it. [/quote]

Which is why most people don’t confront random people on the street, and why it has been stated over and over that Zimmerman used poor judgment in doing so. [/quote]

No question. He was an extreme dumb ass. People ask why do I choose to be harder on him when both actions ended up in death. Well,
he is still alive, He was the Adult,
He was a CCW holder(concealed carry),
He pointed out Tray and He persued.

And he did all of this without once thinking I could kill someone if this goes wrong, This bad guy may not be alone. What if I have to shoot my neighbors are on all sides if I miss I could kill one of them.

But why should he have thought of any of that? Well what is happening to him and what happended to Tray is why we should ALL think that way. Not sure how it is in Florida but I had to take a class to get my CCW even though I’m retired military and had to take 3 others to get one for multiple states. Each class they went over YOU MUST ALWAY BE AWARE YOUR ACTIONS COULD END IN FATALITY.

548

I think its ironic people crying George zimmerman a racist, when the only actual evidence of anything coming close to racism came out of trayvons mouth.

And to ninja, I wasn’t aware zimmerman walked up and down the street shouting how much better Hispanic people are than black people.

549

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:

Oh, okay… So let’s ignore the fact that Zimmerman has been pestering the police every time blacks kids wandered into the community.[/quote]

Every time? OUt of the 400+ calls, how many were from Zimmerman?

Might have something to do with the black people that were allegedly breaking into houses in the neighborhood.

Apparently in that particular neighborhood it appears the majority of the suspects were black. As a whole, nation wide, no, not even remotely close.

It is reacting to a fact pattern at best, profiling at worst.

If you were “dissecting” it fine, but you aren’t. You are turning it into wild and baseless assertions that aren’t even relevant to why I presented the hypothetical in the first place.

Utter bullshit.

even more pretend.

[quote]

Ehehehe, I’m sure you’ve seen the pictures, right? Damn, the cuts… or shall I say, the grazes on his skull, definitely looked like life-threatening injuries resulting from repeated head bashing. [/quote]

I’ve only seen the pictures of his busted up face, not the back of his head. My opinion of the severity of the wounds is moot to the opinion of EMT personnel on the scene anywho.

Point being, I don’t know that he was lying, or walking back to his truck. Neither do you.

[quote]This is something I read somewhere. I’ll post the link later, got to hit the gym soon:

There is no way GZ could pull his gun as described. On his back with his holster against his hip, his holster inside his waistband, while being pinned by TM who is supposedly straddling him. This position means TMÃ?¢??s legs are blocking access to GZ’s waist area (especially if he wiggles Ã?¢??downwardÃ?¢?? through the straddling legs), as well as the ground and clothing making it impossible to reach and pull a gun. In this position you cannot pull a gun on a wet and rainy night without some evidence on the gun. But the fact is GZ’s elbow is too long to reach his waist since he claimed to be pinning TMÃ?¢??s arm while attempting this trick.

Now… who’s lying again?[/quote]

I don’t know. I have no idea who said that, and the description sucks so I’ll wat for the link to pass judgment.

[quote]
Oh, so Trayvon used headsets now? Where does it say that? Did they find headsets by his corpse? Are you fucking kidding me with this bullshit? LOLOLOL!!![/quote]

Merely an example of how someone might be mistaken about whether or not another individual was on the phone. I didn’t intend to present that as fact. My bad.

Why would he automatically need two hands to bash a head, and it isn’t outside the realm of possibility that Martin could have been going for a body shot and not the weapon… We’ve established Zimmerman doesn’t posses top notch judgment many times…

Seems suspect for sure. Police didn’t seem to think much of it though…

At what point did this happen?

Contention is CSI did a piss poor job on the crime scene, it was raining, and seeing as there is photo proof Zimmerman was bleeding, it is hard pressed to not question the CSI technique in recovery of evidence. I don’t know. Doesn’t prove murder though.

You seem to be an expert on body position and what the visible signs of dizziness are, so couldn’t his arms have ended up that way because he was breaking his fall backwards, and he passed away before he could bring them out from under neither him?

Don’t know.

Please back up your accusations with quotes, or stop making them.

Funny you ignore my rape analogies repeatedly when they poke holes in your logic, yet use them to try and portray me as saying something I didn’t.

Stalking? There we go with your word choice inconsistencies. You bust my balls for using “racist” but are totally okay using “stalking”. Please be consistent.

And to answer your question: the kind that jumps the person following after they doubled around and hid while that person was walking back to their truck? lol.

You don’t know that Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation, so please stop pretending you do…

No, and I’ve explained this like 4 times now.

No. You are conflating.

I said Martin using the word cracker makes a fairly decent case he is a racist. I should have said bigot so you wouldn’t throw a hissy fit, but whatever. Martin being a racist makes his violent reaction toward Zimmerman’s foolish actions a reasonable conclusion.

I have, multiple times, yet you continue to down the same roads of fallacy…

What? What are you even talking about?

If I make a statement about Martin using the word cracker, and you rant on and on about the “N-Word”, and then I point out your rant is irrelevant, to which you claim it is a “counterpoint”, to which I point out it is not because a “counterpoint” would actually be relevant to my initial statement, this all somehow means I think my opinion is superior?

Does that make sense to anyone here? Open question.

What bullshit? Logic?

Quite apparent.

If I had an issue, I would have done just that. My point was your inconsistencies in ball busting over the use of the word racist v bigot, because racist is inappropriate in this context. Because the entire time, you’ve failed to call Zimmerman by his name even 3% of the time…

Um yeah, this says more about you than anything. Thanks for the analysis though. I’ll add therapist to your powers of medical diagnosis over the internet.

550

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Regarding the actual case:

  1. The prosecution played Mr. Zimmerman’s interview. He was well-spoken, credible, made sense, and all-in-all was persuasive. In short, the opposite of the fat girl with the “court nails” who clearly was a walking perjury machine. Putting on the tape was stupid move by the prosecution. Now Mr. Zimmerman has told his story doesn’t even have to take the stand.

  2. The policeman stated that Mr. Zimmerman was very sad/upset he killed Mr. Martin. Stated that it was against his Catholic faith to kill anyone. Indeed, was very sad and suprised. This pretty much kills the 2nd Degree “intent to kill” requirement.

  3. The defense asked the cop if he believed Zimmerman’s story — AND THE COP SAID “YES” I BELIEVED ZIMMERMAN. Why? Because the cop lied to Zimmerman and told him it had all been videotaped to try to shake him — and Zimmerman’s response was “Thank G-d, I hoped someone had a video and could show what I said was true.”

Zimmerman should be paying the prosecution. All the witnesses have been his.[/quote]

You know, I don’t know much about lawyership but…isn’t it rule #1 that you never ask a question to a witness you don’t already know the answer to??? Why ask the cop the question if you’re even a halfway decent prosecutor?

If I was a defense lawyer I could hardly hope for a better strategy. I would be praying I could do exactly what the prosecution is doing…as the defense lawyer. Their team must be toasting the prosecution nightly at dinner.

551

[quote]Love Nike wrote:

I asked before and it was overlooked, can prosecution change the charges to manslaughter or can that only be done at the beginning of the trial?

[/quote]

I believe only at the beginning of the trial–which is why most prosecutors and DA’s look at the evidence and likely witness quality before determining what they are going to charge with. This is also why you get a lot of prosecutor’s trying to bully into deals when they may be light on evidence: e.g. " you know you’re guilty. We know you’re guilty. But if you play nice we’ll only charge you on manslaughter. If not…then your ass is mine" kinda thing.

Also, is your profile picture a CGI job? cuz that tattoo is trippy.

552

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Love Nike wrote:

I asked before and it was overlooked, can prosecution change the charges to manslaughter or can that only be done at the beginning of the trial?

[/quote]

I believe only at the beginning of the trial–which is why most prosecutors and DA’s look at the evidence and likely witness quality before determining what they are going to charge with. This is also why you get a lot of prosecutor’s trying to bully into deals when they may be light on evidence: e.g. " you know you’re guilty. We know you’re guilty. But if you play nice we’ll only charge you on manslaughter. If not…then your ass is mine" kinda thing.

Also, is your profile picture a CGI job? cuz that tattoo is trippy.[/quote]

Thanks for answering that. I was wondering.

I am sure it is CGI or even just photoshopping the pic onto the tongue. =)

553

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

Every time? OUt of the 400+ calls, how many were from Zimmerman? [/quote]

I repeat. Every time Zimcunt saw a black kids, which was a dozen times, he called the cops. Racially profiling. Any black kids for him= thief/thug/ raider.

[quote] countingbeans wrote:

It is reacting to a fact pattern at best, profiling at worst. [/quote]

Yeah. Keep on tiptoeing around the subject.

It is racially profiling. You see a black kid visiting some friends (I’m not talking about Trayvon in this case, but a teenager who was visiting his girlfriend and whom Zims harassed) in the gated community and, you automatically assume he’s a criminal. Racially profiling.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

If you were “dissecting” it fine, but you aren’t. You are turning it into wild and baseless assertions that aren’t even relevant to why I presented the hypothetical in the first place. [/quote]

I don’t care how you see it. It is called having a debate. People debate differently. It is up to you to know how to tackle my ‘‘wild and baseless assertions’’. Cry me a fucking river.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’ve only seen the pictures of his busted up face, not the back of his head. My opinion of the severity of the wounds is moot to the opinion of EMT personnel on the scene anywho.[/quote]

‘‘Busted up face’’??? LMFAO!!! I’m sure you have seen a boxer’s busted face at the end of 12th round fight. Rihanna had a busted face when Chris brown fucked her up.

Fuck me! I won’t even bothered with that shit. LMFAO!!!

[quote]Countingbeans wrote:

Point being, I don’t know that he was lying, or walking back to his truck. Neither do you.
…
Why would he automatically need two hands to bash a head, and it isn’t outside the realm of possibility that Martin could have been going for a body shot and not the weapon… We’ve established Zimmerman doesn’t posses top notch judgment many times…
… [/quote]

All right then. Okay. One only needs one hand to bash a head against the basement.

[quote] Countingbeans:
At what point did this happen? [/quote]

Oh, apparently when Trayvon was straddling the fat fuck on the ground…

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Doesn’t prove murder though.[/quote]

It does prove Zimcunt lied. We’re not talking about the murder. You asked for proof Zimcunt lied.

And lol at the rain washing up Trayvon’s DNA but magically, Zimcunt’s DNA decides to stay put. Haha!

[quote]coutningbeans wrote:

You seem to be an expert on body position and what the visible signs of dizziness are, so couldn’t his arms have ended up that way because he was breaking his fall backwards, and he passed away before he could bring them out from under neither him?
[/quote]

I’m not claiming to be an expert on anything. I’m bringing you facts that happened that night based on witnesses accounts, police accounts and photos taken of the body of a dead innocent boy.

Trayvon was not straddling him. Zimcunt at some point admitted pining the kid down, using some MMA technique. A statement the fat pig later changed, another proof he’s a fucking liar.

He was on top of that kid during that ‘‘fight’’. So, are you telling me Trayvon was able to topple over some fat lard 50 pounds heavier than him? If I remember well, Zimcunt was the one with some Martial arts experience. He sure knew how to control his victim in that position. Trayvon was found by police on his tummy, before being rolled over for CPR.

Have you heard John Guy’s testimony? He told Zimcunt to get off Trayvon. Or was he lying about the fat lard being on top of that kid?

Maybe you choose to ignore all those accounts because you want to discredit anything that doesn’t support that murderer. Your fucking choice.

[quote]Countingbeans wrote:

Don’t know. [/quote]

Lol. Of course you don’t.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Please back up your accusations with quotes, or stop making them. [/quote]

Or else what? You’ll jump through my screen to strangle me?

You’ve been supporting Zimcunt since your first post on here. And you are still doing so. So spare me with the ‘‘the fairness’’ bullshit.

[quote]coutinbeans wrote:

Funny you ignore my rape analogies repeatedly when they poke holes in your logic, yet use them to try and portray me as saying something I didn’t. [/quote]

But then ignore my analogies too! You’re free to do so! C’mon!

[quote] Countingbeans wrote:
Stalking? There we go with your word choice inconsistencies. You bust my balls for using “racist” but are totally okay using “stalking”. Please be consistent.

[/quote]

Oh, all right. 'cos following someone like a fucking creep is merely that. ‘‘Following.’’

Gotcha.

[quote] Countingbeans wrote:
And to answer your question: the kind that jumps the person following after they doubled around and hid while that person was walking back to their truck? lol. [/quote]

Well, I’m glad you actually prefer Zimcunt’s version of events. Not biased, my fucking black ass.

You use hypothetical scenarios. I use them too.

Deal-with-it.

[quote]countinbeans wrote:

What? What are you even talking about?

If I make a statement about Martin using the word cracker, and you rant on and on about the “N-Word”, and then I point out your rant is irrelevant, to which you claim it is a “counterpoint”, to which I point out it is not because a “counterpoint” would actually be relevant to my initial statement, this all somehow means I think my opinion is superior? [/quote]

I don’t know. You tell me.

[quote]countinbeans wrote:

What bullshit? Logic? [/quote]

No your bullshit. A big load of it.

[quote]countinbeans wrote:
If I had an issue, I would have done just that. My point was your inconsistencies in ball busting over the use of the word racist v bigot, because racist is inappropriate in this context. [/quote]

Nope. I was pretty much consistent with that ball busting, thank you very much. I understand it must be too hard for you to grasp the concept that using the word ‘‘cracker’’ doesn’t make one a racist.

[quote]countinbeans wrote:
Because the entire time, you’ve failed to call Zimmerman by his name even 3% of the time… [/quote]

Lol. You have an issue with me not calling a killer by his name? LOL.

Says the guy who started this exchange with me, by calling Trayvon ‘‘Martian’’ then later, blamed it on typo. LOLOLOL!!! Please, I’d call that fat fuck however I like. Deal the fuck with it. If that irks you, since you’re team Zimcunt, stop addressing me.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Um yeah, this says more about you than anything. Thanks for the analysis though. I’ll add therapist to your powers of medical diagnosis over the internet.

[/quote]

Don’t thank me. All the snide remarks, and the subtle comments to mark yourself as some kind of intelligent being and belittle me are there on your posts. No analysis is needed.

I’ve only been on this site for a couple of years, but your posts on PWI says more about you and that smart pants/elitist/superiority complex than anything. I remember, in PWI, VTballa making fun of you and your clique about your almighty brains and, you guys called him stupid for coming up with ‘‘silly’’ arguments. It turned out the guy was a Mensa member, which was fucking awesome because that shut you guys up, lol.

I’m still glad I wasn’t the only who had noticed.

554

DR Valerie Rao is my fucking hero!!!

She confirmed what most have been saying about Zimcunt’s injuries.

Yeap, so minor, they couldn’t possible be life threatening.

555

Beans, why are you responding to DN, he/she is a troll and ignorant beyond belief. You will never make her/him unbiasedly see the facts that have been presented.

556

[quote]stefan128 wrote:
Beans, why are you responding to DN, he/she is a troll and ignorant beyond belief. You will never make her/him unbiasedly see the facts that have been presented. [/quote]

Lol!

Says the dumbass who stated Laura Dean’s empire crumbled only because she used the N word 20 years ago. Biased much?

Yet the facts were already presented, and showed Deen was being sued by a white woman for sexism and the mistreatments of other employees in the work place. Events that happened RECENTLY.

Lol. Hope your ass got me on ignore. It’ll save you from dealing with my shit.

557

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
DR Valerie Rao is my fucking hero!!!

She confirmed what most have been saying about Zimcunt’s injuries.

Yeap, so minor, they couldn’t possible be life threatening.[/quote]

1st- Im stealing that gif.

2nd- Just because they are not life threatening injuries it does not mean Zimm didn’t think he was in danger or that Trey meant to cause him great harm.

His dumb ass got lucky, because if he really did follow a bad guy adult or gang member running to his crew he would be dead and his gun, car and by the looks of his last picture donuts would all be in those hands.

558

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
DR Valerie Rao is my fucking hero!!!

She confirmed what most have been saying about Zimcunt’s injuries.

Yeap, so minor, they couldn’t possible be life threatening.[/quote]

1st- Im stealing that gif.

2nd- Just because they are not life threatening injuries it does not mean Zimm didn’t think he was in danger or that Trey meant to cause him great harm.

His dumb ass got lucky, because if he really did follow a bad guy adult or gang member running to his crew he would be dead and his gun, car and by the looks of his last picture donuts would all be in those hands.[/quote]

  1. take that giff. It’s yours.

  2. The injuries are not life threatening, which could prove the fat fuck lied about the head bashing. If Trayvon was really banging Zim’s head on concrete, there should have been some kinda fracture. Dr Rao in her testimony today, proved that there were no injuries consistent with multiple hard blows to the head.

There is nothing consistent that backs up Zim fearing for his life. I look at his ‘‘busted’’ face and I laughed. I’ve seen worse than that in my MMA background. Seriously. That guy has been full of bull since day one.

559

[quote]stefan128 wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]stefan128 wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Entertaining.
Very dÃ???Ã???Ã??Ã?©jÃ???Ã???Ã??Ã?  vu’ish, because every thread like this degrades quite ralidly into these same posters babbling to themselves with no Chance of getting through to “the other side” but it’s been somewhat entertaining at the least.

SickSex6, what did that post of yours that I quoted mean?
If you in fact aren’t “RockNinja”, as some people have tagged a supposed poster(posters?), what did that mean?

Cheers[/quote]

Yeah these get bad fast, for rather obvious reasons. People go crazy speculating about all sorts of info before they have any way of knowing all or even close to all the facts, and most everybody ends up looking foolish when the whole thing is played out. Not really worth participating in with the attitudes of most parties involved. [/quote]

Bro, isn’t your wife black? FYI, if she is I am jealous. I am looking to marry a black or mixed girl in the future! [/quote]
she is[/quote]

Damn, very nice!!![/quote]
Lol thanks I guess?

560

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
DR Valerie Rao is my fucking hero!!!

She confirmed what most have been saying about Zimcunt’s injuries.

Yeap, so minor, they couldn’t possible be life threatening.[/quote]

1st- Im stealing that gif.

2nd- Just because they are not life threatening injuries it does not mean Zimm didn’t think he was in danger or that Trey meant to cause him great harm.

His dumb ass got lucky, because if he really did follow a bad guy adult or gang member running to his crew he would be dead and his gun, car and by the looks of his last picture donuts would all be in those hands.[/quote]

  1. take that giff. It’s yours.

  2. The injuries are not life threatening, which could prove the fat fuck lied about the head bashing. If Trayvon was really banging Zim’s head on concrete, there should have been some kinda fracture. Dr Rao in her testimony today, proved that there were no injuries consistent with multiple hard blows to the head.

There is nothing consistent that backs up Zim fearing for his life. I look at his ‘‘busted’’ face and I laughed. I’ve seen worse than that in my MMA background. Seriously. That guy has been full of bull since day one.

[/quote]

That would be interesting. But Looking and listening to Zimmerman it’s hard to gauge what HE would consider " Life Threatening".

I seen the original pics an he just looked like a guy who got beat up. But ive seen what a real Bashing could do. Who knows, they could and may argue he thought that ass kicking was the end. I’m not sure the law will care if was or was not at Deaths door. Just that he thought he was.