Truthdefender wrote: Noentry wrote: handy4321 wrote: Which event are you referring to? If the "event" you are referring to is the shooting, it was immediately preceded by the ASSAULT AND BATTERY! Where I live, that is a crime. If someone were on top of me and bashing my head into the concrete, I would do whatever possible to put an end to it also. So you see, the word "innocent" does not fit Trayvon Martin in any way shape or form. Martin was in the middle of committing a crime and was stopped. He always had the choice not to commit that crime.
There is no proof he smashed his head into concrete. The only witness who saw Trayvon on top did not see this. So this is you being manipulated by the media
What you are doing is blaming this event on the result instead of the incitement.
What started this event? Who started this event?
At what point did this situation begin in your mind?
I received 8 years in prison for continuing to fight a man after he started it and then hit the ground, so according to the law, what Trayvon did was a felony--which was the first crime in this case. And felony assault does warrant self-defense in some form.
And I was only 18, and yes NE, I recognize TM for what he was. Because I was him. Probably worse, but you know nothing of our culture. Your Joe Citizen here, brotha!
TD do you think when you was convicted the law was wrong?
I am glad you broke away from all that type of life.
Well done sir.
1 more question do you think you were an adult or a child when you had the fight?
In the eyes of the law you were an adult? But you know better then the law about who you were?
The question I have to anyone is: Was Trayvon right to profile Zimmerman as a white cracker?
He saw a white man following him and he racially profiled him as trouble maker.
This mistaken prejudice lead to the negative attitude of Trayvon towards Zimmerman. Was Trayvon right to do this?
Is this acceptable?
If it was ok for Zimmerman, then why not for Trayvon?
We have all acknowledge their are racist in all societies so in essence for Trayvon Zimmerman could of been KKK. Is this what you mean by acceptable racial profiling? Remember Many of you have said GZ was correct in his judgement based on appearance, you say GZ was justified because a black gang was targeting the neighborhood . Then it must also mean Trayvon was right also to racially profile Zimmerman as a trouble maker up to no good. Because some white people are members of the KKK or out and out racist.
You see this is a two way street.
I have said it before and I will say it again, if you assume a person is up to no good because of their appearance, you are making an assumption based on false pretenses. You will be wrong the majority of the time.
I am a London born Greek Cypriot. There are only 1.2mill of Greek Cypriots in the world. Where ever I go I will always be the minority and I have as a child felt the pain of racism. As an adult no one would show me their true feelings because I am not a man who takes shit and in 25 years I have not been subjected to racism.
Oh tell a lie in my 20's I was driving my car when I heard a group of guys say fucking Black cunt. I looked around and there were no black men around, it then dawn on me they were talking about me. My ancestry is from the middle east and I tan very easily. I was taken aback not because they thought I was black but the racism they displayed, for me it was disgusting.
I do not change how I treat or act towards a person because of their appearance.
Be it skin colour or ethnicity. Those of you who can not understand this is most likely because you have never been a victim of racist. Or are just to ignorant to accept not everyone is like you.
If anyone cant understand this then I feel sorry for you, you display great ignorance.
I tell you what why dont we let the two jurors who have spoken out have their say, they are the ones who saw all the evidence.
Upload to Disclose.tv VIDEO
Upload to Disclose.tv VIDEO
Upload to Disclose.tv
The first juror reflects what I have been saying since day 1.
The second Juror has said GZ was wrong to get out of his car. She also said nobody new what really happened.
The basics is GZ made a judgment call and he was wrong, he followed the child and spooked him, the child responded and he shoot the child dead.
Regardless in the end there is not enough evidence to prosecute him so he can not be found guilty.
Many who are guilty have been given a verdict of not guilty in court because there is not enough evidence, this is nothing new.