Trayvon Attacked Gay Man! Omg

I'm not sure which is worse, the fact you thought anything Rush Limbaugh had to say was truthful, and accurate, or that you went to see what he said about anything. :eek:
 
I'm not sure which is worse, the fact you thought anything Rush Limbaugh had to say was truthful, and accurate, or that you went to see what he said about anything. :eek:

Uh, EMAP? Rachel Jeantel is the source, and others verify it.

I stopped listening to Rush prolly about 1999, ditto Bill O'Reilly a little later. But I make it a point to collect my news from a variety of sources, including lesbians, blacks, RINOs, and others. I toss all the opinions in a box and sort by shapes (square, round, triangles). Rachel Jentel really did go on national tv and blabber about how Trayvon thought Zimmerman was queer.

Its beautiful drama: One fool stalks a 'thug', and the other fool stalks a 'queer'. Half of America roots for the racist, and the other half cheers for the homophobe.

You cheered the homophobe, right?
 
All I know is I wish the media and the DOJ had been half this concerned when we had an ambassador killed on foreign soil.

If the DOJ goe after Zimmerman it is nothing short of bullshit. The DOJ does not belong getting involved in "wrongful death" suits unless they are going to get involved with all of them.

Whole things a cluster fuck right down to the fact the mass media is disappointed the protests are peaceful. Absolutely disgusting they have spent an entire year trying to incite a race riot.

And admiral that the people protesting have shown restraint and not made themselves look like animals which is exactly what was wanted here.

This country is in sad shape.
 
All I know is I wish the media and the DOJ had been half this concerned when we had an ambassador killed on foreign soil.

If the DOJ goe after Zimmerman it is nothing short of bullshit. The DOJ does not belong getting involved in "wrongful death" suits unless they are going to get involved with all of them.

Whole things a cluster fuck right down to the fact the mass media is disappointed the protests are peaceful. Absolutely disgusting they have spent an entire year trying to incite a race riot.

And admiral that the people protesting have shown restraint and not made themselves look like animals which is exactly what was wanted here.

This country is in sad shape.

Well...except those looters in San Diego.
 
All I know is I wish the media and the DOJ had been half this concerned when we had an ambassador killed on foreign soil.

If the DOJ goe after Zimmerman it is nothing short of bullshit. The DOJ does not belong getting involved in "wrongful death" suits unless they are going to get involved with all of them.

Whole things a cluster fuck right down to the fact the mass media is disappointed the protests are peaceful. Absolutely disgusting they have spent an entire year trying to incite a race riot.

And admiral that the people protesting have shown restraint and not made themselves look like animals which is exactly what was wanted here.

This country is in sad shape.

Politically the Democrats lost sight of the fact that all the players are Democrats: Blacks, Hispanics, and gays. They still haven't got the idea that theyre standing on their dicks. In the military we call this friendly-fire, where your side bombs you to hell with the best of intentions.
 
What your wonderful source, Rushie boy, failed to point out was Zimmerman, racist or no, used racial profiling, if Trayvon had been pale(as in pale face) Zimmerman would not have followed him.

It really doesn't matter what Trayvon felt, if Zimmerman would have followed what he was told to do by the 911 operator, Trayvon would be alive.

If Zimmerman had been black and Trayvon pale, what would have happened is, he would have been arrested at the scene, later charged with murder or man slaughter and convicted. Double so in a racist state like Florida.

By the way using racial profiling to kill Trayvon was a violation of his civil rights.

For the most vocally homophobic man who post on the Author's Hangout board to accuse someone else of being homophobic in incomprehensible.
 
What your wonderful source, Rushie boy, failed to point out was Zimmerman, racist or no, used racial profiling, if Trayvon had been pale(as in pale face) Zimmerman would not have followed him.

It really doesn't matter what Trayvon felt, if Zimmerman would have followed what he was told to do by the 911 operator, Trayvon would be alive.

If Zimmerman had been black and Trayvon pale, what would have happened is, he would have been arrested at the scene, later charged with murder or man slaughter and convicted. Double so in a racist state like Florida.

By the way using racial profiling to kill Trayvon was a violation of his civil rights.

For the most vocally homophobic man who post on the Author's Hangout board to accuse someone else of being homophobic in incomprehensible.

Trayvons girlfriend says he thought Zimmerman was queer. Rush didn't say it, I didn't say it, RACHEL JEANTEL said it on tv. Maybe Trayvon was profiling queers.

If O'Mara had brought it up in court half the Democrat Party woulda died of apoplexy on the spot. MIZZ JEANTEL? DID TRAYVON THINK GEORGE ZIMMERMAN WAS A FAGGOT BUTT BANDIT? Yassuh! He sho did! He say he gwine kick dat cracka fairys ass for eye-ball fuckin his booty.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
By the way if you'd have checked out the facts, something your good buddy Rushie didn't do.

"Rachel Jeantel said she told Martin to run from George Zimmerman because he might be a rapist". Trayvon didn't run he walked away and Zimmerman stalked him.

So it wasn't anything Trayvon said and we have no way of knowing what he thought. He's dead, he was shot and killed by George Zimmerman.

Why waste my words, you're a just another racist good old boy.
 
Last edited:
Oh, it was established that he walked away? That's certainly significant, if true. Source please--or are you leaning too far in the other direction just to (over)argue your point? (and therefore not going to bother to respond.)

I think neither one walked away or was guiltless. But I'd certainly change my mind on that (not that my opinion matters to the actual situation) seeing something cited from a credible source (which, no, doesn't include Rush Limbaugh, it should go without saying).

I think both exhibited the easily stirred up, going straight to rancor and violence, polarized attitude that we even see a lot of right on this forum--not to mention this thread. An angry nation/forum looking for someone to blame, hate, and hurt.

Not putting a gag order on the jury certainly has stirred up the waters. A second wind for the media. I'm so tired of turning to the supposed "developing" news channels--just to make sure that nothing catastrophic is happening--just to see them all running the same interview tapes on this case. I've already sent a query to CNN asking why they bother to have two channels anymore.
 
By the way if you'd have checked out the facts, something your good buddy Rushie didn't do.

"Rachel Jeantel said she told Martin to run from George Zimmerman because he might be a rapist". Trayvon didn't run he walked away and Zimmerman stalked him.

So it wasn't anything Trayvon said and we have no way of knowing what he thought. He's dead, he was shot and killed by George Zimmerman.

Why waste my words, you're a just another racist good old boy.

I read Rachel Jeantels gay rapist comments on CNN or wherever she was interviewed. Limbaugh reposted the interview.

I'm convinced youre no real lawyer. Maybe a para-legal for Guardian ad Litem. But you aint no lawyer.
 
What your wonderful source, Rushie boy, failed to point out was Zimmerman, racist or no, used racial profiling, if Trayvon had been pale(as in pale face) Zimmerman would not have followed him.

It really doesn't matter what Trayvon felt, if Zimmerman would have followed what he was told to do by the 911 operator, Trayvon would be alive.

If Zimmerman had been black and Trayvon pale, what would have happened is, he would have been arrested at the scene, later charged with murder or man slaughter and convicted. Double so in a racist state like Florida.

By the way using racial profiling to kill Trayvon was a violation of his civil rights.

For the most vocally homophobic man who post on the Author's Hangout board to accuse someone else of being homophobic in incomprehensible.

And if both had been white there would have been no story at all.

No, I'm sorry if Martin would have been white Zimmerman having Hispanic heritage would have played in.

Zimmerman was seen as white because it made sexier headlines.

My only point with this is that it's a sad state of affairs when the media is upset there wasn't more violence.

And I hope Zimmerman takes NBC big time in the LIbel suit. Not because I feel he should have got away with it, but what NBC did was beyond excusable and they need to be made an example of.

That idiot Spike Lee cost himself some cash when he tweeted what he thought was Zimmerman's address and almost got people killed, Its NBC's turn now.

BTW

Hi Amy
 
Oh, it was established that he walked away? That's certainly significant, if true. Source please--or are you leaning too far in the other direction just to (over)argue your point? (and therefore not going to bother to respond.)

I think neither one walked away or was guiltless. But I'd certainly change my mind on that (not that my opinion matters to the actual situation) seeing something cited from a credible source (which, no, doesn't include Rush Limbaugh, it should go without saying).

I think both exhibited the easily stirred up, going straight to rancor and violence, polarized attitude that we even see a lot of right on this forum--not to mention this thread. An angry nation/forum looking for someone to blame, hate, and hurt.

Not putting a gag order on the jury certainly has stirred up the waters. A second wind for the media. I'm so tired of turning to the supposed "developing" news channels--just to make sure that nothing catastrophic is happening--just to see them all running the same interview tapes on this case. I've already sent a query to CNN asking why they bother to have two channels anymore.

All you have to do is listen to the tapes, Zimmerman's call to the police dispatch, Zimmerman's first recorded interview with police. Along with proving Zimmerman did profile Trayvon and the following.

The facts from the tapes. George Zimmerman followed Trayvon Martin while in his car even after the dispatcher told him not to. Trayvon was not running at this time he was walking. Trayvon later approached George's car, walked around the car then ran away. Zimmerman states he doesn't know why Trayvon ran, he had his car windows up and doors locked because he was very afraid but he exits his car to get an address, not the actions of a man in fear. The dispatcher tells him he doesn't need an address they know where his car is and to wait for the police. He doesn't wait but he state he wasn't following Trayvon but he may have been walking in the direction Trayvon went, again not the action of a man in fear. Zimmerman then states he decided to return to his car but instead of returning to his car, he leaves the street and walks between two sets of town homes to their back yards. He later states he may have seen Trayvon walk or run between those town homes, he's not sure. This is where the tragedy happened.

We all know George's story as to what happened next. What you may not know is that when the first witness and the first police officer arrived Zimmerman was on top of Trayvon holding Trayvon's hands over his head, this is according to Zimmerman as recorded in the first police interview. Zimmerman's explanation was he was trying to help Trayvon, some help, he's sitting on top of a boy he's just shot, who isn't dead yet, holding the boy's hands over his head.

I do agree with you the press along with talk radio and TV, on both sides, did and still is going overboard. Personally I believe George Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter(unintentional homicide). I don't believe Zimmerman intended to kill Trayvon. If the prosecution would not have over reached they could have proved manslaughter. The defense did their job they proved reasonable doubt.

The press on both side only spoon feeds the public what they want them to hear, know. In some cases the transcripts of the recorded evidence, between both sides, are unbelievably inaccurate. If you're interested you can hear most of the interviews here http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/ and form your own opinion.
 
All you have to do is listen to the tapes, Zimmerman's call to the police dispatch, Zimmerman's first recorded interview with police. Along with proving Zimmerman did profile Trayvon and the following.

The facts from the tapes. George Zimmerman followed Trayvon Martin while in his car even after the dispatcher told him not to. Trayvon was not running at this time he was walking. Trayvon later approached George's car, walked around the car then ran away. Zimmerman states he doesn't know why Trayvon ran, he had his car windows up and doors locked because he was very afraid but he exits his car to get an address, not the actions of a man in fear. The dispatcher tells him he doesn't need an address they know where his car is and to wait for the police. He doesn't wait but he state he wasn't following Trayvon but he may have been walking in the direction Trayvon went, again not the action of a man in fear. Zimmerman then states he decided to return to his car but instead of returning to his car, he leaves the street and walks between two sets of town homes to their back yards. He later states he may have seen Trayvon walk or run between those town homes, he's not sure. This is where the tragedy happened.

We all know George's story as to what happened next. What you may not know is that when the first witness and the first police officer arrived Zimmerman was on top of Trayvon holding Trayvon's hands over his head, this is according to Zimmerman as recorded in the first police interview. Zimmerman's explanation was he was trying to help Trayvon, some help, he's sitting on top of a boy he's just shot, who isn't dead yet, holding the boy's hands over his head.

I do agree with you the press along with talk radio and TV, on both sides, did and still is going overboard. Personally I believe George Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter(unintentional homicide). I don't believe Zimmerman intended to kill Trayvon. If the prosecution would not have over reached they could have proved manslaughter. The defense did their job they proved reasonable doubt.

The press on both side only spoon feeds the public what they want them to hear, know. In some cases the transcripts of the recorded evidence, between both sides, are unbelievably inaccurate. If you're interested you can hear most of the interviews here http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/ and form your own opinion.

Youre no lawyer. A real lawyer knows the difference tween criminal negligence (manslaughter) and involuntary manslaughter (culpable negligence).

Say I come upon a rattlesnake at the bus stop and the school bus is coming; I have an obligation to alert the bus of the hazard, as well as others. If I leave, its criminal negligence if a kid is bit and dies. This is manslaughter.

If I fire a rifle close to occupied homes, and a bullet hits someone and kills them, its culpable negligence regardless of whether I have a hunting license or permission to hunt.

The state coulda charged George with affray or disorderly conduct, and got a conviction. But they rolled the dice and lost.
 
I didn't listen to all the tapes, no. Only snippets here and there on the interminable news coverage. The whole "stand your ground" issue, however, revolves around the moment when they did directly face off against each other. The prosecution had to be incompetent (and there's evidence they were) not to establish that it was Martin standing his ground at that point, not Zimmerman, or they must have accepted that Martin initiated the physical contact--became offense rather than holding his ground. So, I wonder if the defense was able to establish that it was Zimmerman standing his ground better than the prosecution could (or even tried to) establish that it was Martin standing his ground at that point. We'll see what happens on appeal.

Somewhere recently one factor I was holding against Martin was time of day. It appears it was only about 7 pm. I had thought that it was later at night. It was a gated community. If he wasn't a resident or visiting a resident Martin had no business being there from the get go, and I would find it reasonable for a resident or watch officer (it's not clear to me that Zimmerman was officially on duty as a watch officer rather than just being an off-duty vigilante) to zero in on him and even challenge him. If he'd been there late at night, I'd hold it more against him for being there (and did until I heard it was earlier in the day).

I think I would have gone with manslaughter for Zimmerman at a minimum simply because Zimmerman left his vehicle when advised by authority not to do so.

But I don't see either zeroing in on Martin or challenging his right to be in a gated community (which was experiencing a spate of robberies) until/unless he did belong there as wrong. I think they both were confrontational and that that was what's really at fault (as I noted in my earlier posting)--that the whole atmosphere being flamed at the moment (including in posting behavior on this forum) is fomenting that.

The "stand your ground" concept obviously needs rework--by someone other than the NRA.

But I also find the lengths that yammering on profiling have gone to be out of whack. Get real. We all profile everyone who drifts by us--it's called having a healthy self-defense mechanism. And if we are more suspicious of some than others there's usually a healthy basis for having made that determination. There obviously needs to be some consideration of what is reasonable profiling for the circumstance and what is not, but the left is being just as ridiculous on this issue as the right is on stand your ground (with a gun), I think.
 
Last edited:
I didn't listen to all the tapes, no. Only snippets here and there on the interminable news coverage. The whole "stand your ground" issue, however, revolves around the moment when they did directly face off against each other. The prosecution had to be incompetent (and there's evidence they were) not to establish that it was Martin standing his ground at that point, not Zimmerman, or they must have accepted that Martin initiated the physical contact--became offense rather than holding his ground. So, I wonder if the defense was able to establish that it was Zimmerman standing his ground better than the prosecution could (or even tried to) establish that it was Martin standing his ground at that point. We'll see what happens on appeal.

Somewhere recently one factor I was holding against Martin was time of day. It appears it was only about 7 pm. I had thought that it was later at night. It was a gated community. If he wasn't a resident or visiting a resident Martin had no business being there from the get go, and I would find it reasonable for a resident or watch officer (it's not clear to me that Zimmerman was officially on duty as a watch officer rather than just being an off-duty vigilante) to zero in on him and even challenge him. If he'd been there late at night, I'd hold it more against him for being there (and did until I heard it was earlier in the day).

I think I would have gone with manslaughter for Zimmerman at a minimum simply because Zimmerman left his vehicle when advised by authority not to do so.

But I don't see either zeroing in on Martin or challenging his right to be in a gated community (which was experiencing a spate of robberies) until/unless he did belong there as wrong. I think they both were confrontational and that that was what's really at fault (as I noted in my earlier posting)--that the whole atmosphere being flamed at the moment (including in posting behavior on this forum) is fomenting that.

The "stand your ground" concept obviously needs rework--by someone other than the NRA.

But I also find the lengths that yammering on profiling have gone to be out of whack. Get real. We all profile everyone who drifts by us--it's called having a healthy self-defense mechanism. And if we are more suspicious of some than others there's usually a healthy basis for having made that determination. There obviously needs to be some consideration of what is reasonable profiling for the circumstance and what is not, but the left is being just as ridiculous on this issue as the right is on stand your ground (with a gun), I think.


The lead detective testified that dispatchers have no authority to issue orders to 911 callers, that Zimmerman violated no laws prior to the contact with Martin. And profiling isn't a criminal offense. You play the ball where it lies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Contrary to the early news coverage, this was not a "stand your ground" case. Zimmerman did not assert that as a defense. If he had, there would have been a bench trial on that issue only. If Zimmerman had prevailed, the charges would have been dismissed and he would have been immune from prosecution on state criminal charges.

Zimmerman pled self-defense under the ordinary statute. It allows someone to use deadly force when necessary to protect oneself from harm. It is not available to the aggressor in a conflict, however. Zimmerman succeeded in portraying Martin as the aggressor. This should not be surprising--Martin was unable to tell his side of the story.

The weak link in the prosecution's case was proving what happened after Zimmerman left his vehicle through the instant the shot was fired. Common sense says that Zimmerman confronted Martin and escalated the situation. Proving that happened? Not so easy. Zimmerman was the only witness to those events, and he didn't testify. There was no opportunity to trip him up on cross examination.

Perhaps a better strategy would have been to forget 2nd degree murder and pursue manslaughter, only. But with that jury, its not likely even that strategy would have worked. Juror B37 was entirely sympathetic to Zimmerman from the outset. I don't see her convicting him on anything.
 
No, no, no.

An eye witness saw Zimmerman get atop Trayvon and fire 3 bullets into the kids back.

The medical examiner only found one bullet wound, and it entered Trayvons chest.

This can only mean one thing! Zimmerman had time to steal 2 bullet wounds and tamper with the evidence with the third wound.

I still say the screaming was VM fighting off a woman trying to get some nookie from him.
 
This incident is a perfect example of why, in the old west, everyone checked their guns at the sheriff's office when they came to town. They found, through trial and error, disarming the citizens made the town safer.

What surprises me is that there has been no outcry from the NRA crowd (ZEB?) claiming that if Trayvon had been armed, (like the Sandy Hook teachers should have been armed) he wouldn't have died needlessly. Is there a double standard for black kids wearing hoodies?
 
What surprises me is that there has been no outcry from the NRA crowd (ZEB?) claiming that if Trayvon had been armed, (like the Sandy Hook teachers should have been armed) he wouldn't have died needlessly. Is there a double standard for black kids wearing hoodies?

Yeah, they'd likely both be dead, which would certainly have made CNN dig deeper for programming for several weeks.
 
Contrary to the early news coverage, this was not a "stand your ground" case.

Well, that would be interesting (and typical) if all the polarized yammering about "Stand Your Ground" laws don't have anything to do with the case.
 
No, no, no.

An eye witness saw Zimmerman get atop Trayvon and fire 3 bullets into the kids back.

The medical examiner only found one bullet wound, and it entered Trayvons chest.

This can only mean one thing! Zimmerman had time to steal 2 bullet wounds and tamper with the evidence with the third wound.

I still say the screaming was VM fighting off a woman trying to get some nookie from him.

You are correct. I should have said that no one saw the initiation or escalation of the fight, only the ending of it.
 
In answer to your questions Pilot.
George Zimmerman was not on duty, he was on his way to a store. Truth is neighborhood watch volunteers even when they are patrolling the neighborhood do not have any legal police rights. Admittedly I think neighborhood watch is a good idea, especially in a high crime area.

Trayvon Martin was staying with his Father's Fiancee who lived in the community. He was returning from a convenience store where he had gone to get junk food.(The store video confirms this) Imagine your son goes to a store to buy food and never returns because an adult decides he's a criminal with not one piece of evidence.

George Zimmerman had ample opportunity to roll down his window and ask Trayvon what he was doing. He elected not to.

As far as profiling goes all I can say is there are a lot of white young men committing crimes, no one seems to profile them. In our society if you're a young white male and commit a crime you are much more likely not to be sent to jail and be put on probation than a young male of color. Crime, in my opinion, has to do with poverty not skin color.
 
Back
Top