And you know this how? Is it possible that he turned away and the kid came back after him? Have we heard any facts about what happened in the time between when the operator told him not to pursue and when Trayvon got shot? I'm pretty sure all I've heard is speculation.TTkickedin wrote:The point is, the guy had a direct order from the 911 operator NOT to chase the kid. But he made the poor decision and just did anyway. He get's punched and his head smacked up, and then the kid gets shot.
Again, some reports say he went for Zimmerman's firearm. If he had Zimmerman on the ground (as at least one witness claims) and was going for his handgun, that is a HIGHLY dangerous situation. Again, I said if here. I don't know, and I don't think you do either. Since I don't know for sure, I'm certainly not ready to condemn Zimmerman yet. I don't know how anyone can be without having all of the facts.TTkickedin wrote:Not to mention, the kid was unarmed. he would not have enough time to kill the guy with just his bare fists. Bumps cuts and bruises vs loss of life? Come on now.
In her case it appears that the facts did not support murder. They may not in this case either. Our court system in this country requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If that's effed, I'd hate to see what we would call the alternative.TTkickedin wrote:Does anyone smell another "Casey Anthony" trial, IF any? (Would show how F*cked up the courts system in Florida is.).
Exactly.PapaSmurf2k3 wrote:If the broadcast station is simply playing the 911 recording, it doesn't matter where its coming from. Its not like Fox News overdubbed it with what they want to tell.Dattebayo wrote:
![]()
911 operators don't give ordersTTkickedin wrote: The point is, the guy had a direct order from the 911 operator NOT to chase the kid. But he made the poor decision and just did anyway. He get's punched and his head smacked up, and then the kid gets shot.
Is what was saidWe don't need you for that
I called you a retard because you jumped to conclusions and made boneheaded assumptions, engaging in an argument with me about claims I never made, contended, or believed in.TTkickedin wrote: I'll answer the last part first. This isn't an argument. You turned it to be that way once you decided to call me a retard and say that I have no reading comprehension. Getting pissed was your mistake...It's the internet, chill out.

whatever happened to civil debates where everyone was allowed to have their own opinions on a subject without attacking each other like school children? you guys took this one way too far.PapaSmurf2k3 wrote:Most everyone agrees with each other thus far anyway, just some people are "leaning" to one side more than another.
Please... go back to the kiddie table...numbnuts240 wrote:did you guys know that the darkie was, at the time, suspended from school because he was found to be in possession of a plastic baggie that had leftover bits of pot in it? quick, someone call norml and their opponents. let's get everyone involved.
Isn't it all wonderful how conjecture takes the place of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in public opinion?audtatious wrote:I've been in fist fights where I was not worried about getting killed. What a great new world it is.
Yet you still have yet to explain what you meant by posting that stereotypical picture. Prove me wrong if you're saying I'm putting words in your mouth. Chances are high that you're bullshitting.Jesda wrote:I called you a retard because you jumped to conclusions and made boneheaded assumptions, engaging in an argument with me about claims I never made, contended, or believed in.TTkickedin wrote: I'll answer the last part first. This isn't an argument. You turned it to be that way once you decided to call me a retard and say that I have no reading comprehension. Getting pissed was your mistake...It's the internet, chill out.
And it seems you've made similar assumptions about a case where the facts are still being investigated.
/yourself
Get your Ps and Qs in order before you start throwing around words like that.TTkickedin wrote:My hypothesis on the situation.
actually he DID use the word correctly.Dattebayo wrote:Get your Ps and Qs in order before you start throwing around words like that.TTkickedin wrote:My hypothesis on the situation.
You CANNOT be serious. You had an entire argument by yourself, against me, with statements I never made, nor believed in. You went off on an unrelated tangent while I was specifically criticizing the media for using imagery to portray good and evil, shaping public opinion before all of the facts were available.TTkickedin wrote:Yet you still have yet to explain what you meant by posting that stereotypical picture. Prove me wrong if you're saying I'm putting words in your mouth. Chances are high that you're bullshitting.
And furthermore, assumptions can't be made now? What I said was an educated guess given what we've been provided with. My hypothesis on the situation. If i want to think that somebody is guilty, I'll say it. If i'm proved wrong, then whatever I'll move on. It's like a NFL game, you want somebody to win but you don't know who will. And there's always an audience with theirsupported 'team'. Assumptions.
"I called you a retard because you jumped to conclusions and made boneheaded assumptions"
^ I hope you don't watch sports, or bet on anything. Retard.
Jesda wrote:
Most importantly, I sincerely apologize for calling you a retard. I give time and money to local/regional activities programs for mentally disabled children and young adults. By calling you a retard I insulted all of them by associating them with you. They deserve better than that.