• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

George Zimmerman's defense reports $10K deficit

You don't know what "decisions" Trayvon made. You don't know whether or not George grabbed at him and tried to detain him.

and you refuse to admit TM actions also played a part in the outcome.

As I asked, what if TM did not struggle/fight GZ? What if he just stood there? TM actions as well as GZ all had a part.

(one again your not answering questions asked. Is that because if you really looked at this case, both GZ and TM made bad decisions that night).

Your right I don't know, as you don't know what TM did. As I have said they both played a role in the exculation of the event.
 
and you refuse to admit TM actions also played a part in the outcome.

As I asked, what if TM did not struggle/fight GZ? What if he just stood there? TM actions as well as GZ all had a part.

(one again your not answering questions asked. Is that because if you really looked at this case, both GZ and TM made bad decisions that night).

Your right I don't know, as you don't know what TM did. As I have said they both played a role in the exculation of the event.

Admit it?

Trayvon had NO history of being controling or violent.. No history of being arrogant..
 
Admit it?

Trayvon had NO history of being controling or violent.. No history of being arrogant..

ok. But that does not show he did not do something that night. (i will use your own example of you defending your child. Did you have a prior history of being violent?)

Now you admit that TM actions played a role in his death.
You still have not answered with your opinion of what if TM did nothing that night. What if he let GZ detain him?

Now admit that TM actions played a role in the tragic ending.
 
ok. But that does not show he did not do something that night. (i will use your own example of you defending your child. Did you have a prior history of being violent?)

Now you admit that TM actions played a role in his death.
You still have not answered with your opinion of what if TM did nothing that night. What if he let GZ detain him?

Now admit that TM actions played a role in the tragic ending.

I didn't hit that boy or abuse him in any way... called his dad.
 
I didn't hit that boy or abuse him in any way... called his dad.

I responded to your point that you stated TM had no history of violent. with saying ok. based on what you have said, TM had no history of being violent.

Yet, you fail to admit that TM actions played a role.
You failed to answer a speculation question of what if TM let GZ detain him (you have stated the cops were on the way).
My guess you do not want to deal with the reality that TM's actions led to his death.

Sorry you can't get a grip on that.
 
I responded to your point that you stated TM had no history of violent. with saying ok. based on what you have said, TM had no history of being violent.

Yet, you fail to admit that TM actions played a role.
You failed to answer a speculation question of what if TM let GZ detain him (you have stated the cops were on the way).
My guess you do not want to deal with the reality that TM's actions led to his death.

Sorry you can't get a grip on that.

Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior.. Neither of the parents or his stepbrothers have any history of violence either.

Try to remember that Trayvon was NOT a threat to George.. nor 'acting suspicous'.. unless walking home is some sort of catalyst for an adult white male with a gun.
 
Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior.. Neither of the parents or his stepbrothers have any history of violence either.

Try to remember that Trayvon was NOT a threat to George.. nor 'acting suspicous'.. unless walking home is some sort of catalyst for an adult white male with a gun.

spin, spin , spin.

No matter what is said you ignore the fact the two did engage.
Again your fail to admit TM actions played a role. As a lawyer would say, Judge, the person is non responsive to the question.


Come back when you are ready to admit TM actions also played a role in the outcome.
 
spin, spin , spin.

No matter what is said you ignore the fact the two did engage.
Again your fail to admit TM actions played a role. As a lawyer would say, Judge, the person is non responsive to the question.


Come back when you are ready to admit TM actions also played a role in the outcome.

Until the moderators tell me to leave I will continue to come back.. George is allowed to act out his fantasy, but can't be held accountable???

Why is that?
 
Until the moderators tell me to leave I will continue to come back.. George is allowed to act out his fantasy, but can't be held accountable???

Why is that?

I was refering to responding to my questions , not your participation on the thread/forum. Sorry for the confusion.

So you willing to admit TM's action played a role in the outcome?
 
I was refering to responding to my questions , not your participation on the thread/forum. Sorry for the confusion.

So you willing to admit TM's action played a role in the outcome?

Trayvon had no history of carrying a gun.. or chasing "suspects".. He didn't call the police 46 times.. IMO Trayvon was a victim of George's extreme desire to be LE.. and the fact that he had been rejected by the SPD.

George's agression was born of his failures, fantasies and denial. Trayvon had no agenda.. He was minding his own business.
 
Trayvon had no history of carrying a gun.. or chasing "suspects".. He didn't call the police 46 times.. IMO Trayvon was a victim of George's extreme desire to be LE.. and the fact that he had been rejected by the SPD.

George's agression was born of his failures, fantasies and denial. Trayvon had no agenda.. He was minding his own business.

Mike is asking you a simple question...Just answer yes or no

M chose to stand and trade words with Z, until M got physical.
 
Mike is asking you a simple question...Just answer yes or no

M chose to stand and trade words with Z, until M got physical.

She won't admit the TM's actions and decisions as well as GZ's played a role in the outcome. She won't recognize that it takes two to have a struggle.
Until she does I do not plan to respond to any of her posts. I have stated both made bad decisions that night.

TM may have been a non agressive teenager. Yet, even non agressive people can become agressive if the situation is right.
 
When you factor in lawyer West .. its over $700 an hour....

Make hay while the sun shines.. Its Floriduh.

sharon ... I love reading your posts ... succinct and right on.
 
Yes, it takes two - a perp and a victim.
And in this case, Trayvon is the perp, and Zimmerman is the victim.



sharon ... I love reading your posts ... succinct and right on.
:doh

Strange that you would say that about a person who hasn't shown they know the evidence or the law.
 
Last edited:
I was refering to responding to my questions , not your participation on the thread/forum. Sorry for the confusion.

So you willing to admit TM's action played a role in the outcome?

So? The State will argue it was Z's actions that provoked TM.
 
and what do you think the defense will argue?

All the defense has is Z claiming TM saw his gun and went for it. Considering the swiss cheese that represents the body of Z's statements the Def is going to have a difficult time getting the jury to believe anything Z said.
 
All the defense has is Z claiming TM saw his gun and went for it.
Wow! What a misstatement of facts.


Considering the swiss cheese that represents the body of Z's statements the Def is going to have a difficult time getting the jury to believe anything Z said.
The jury is not going to be persuaded by meaningless discrepancies.
Nor are they going to think his account is "swiss cheese". :doh
iLOL
 
All the defense has is Z claiming TM saw his gun and went for it. Considering the swiss cheese that represents the body of Z's statements the Def is going to have a difficult time getting the jury to believe anything Z said.

Well at least you answered. Not much of a one, but an answer.

So what do you think the outcome would have been if TM did not confront GZ? i.e. let GZ detain him till police arrive. Took no action towards or against GZ,
(and don't come back with GZ just walked up and shot TM, we know that did not happen. there was a confrontation between the two).

Both made bad decisions. It is interesting that the TM side will not even give it a thought that TM could of esculated the situation.
 
All the defense has is Z claiming TM saw his gun and went for it. Considering the swiss cheese that represents the body of Z's statements the Def is going to have a difficult time getting the jury to believe anything Z said.

Z's counsel getting , the jury to believe *whatever* is not the issue

The issue is.....the state has no evidence to contradict Z's claims.
 
Mike is asking you a simple question...Just answer yes or no

M chose to stand and trade words with Z, until M got physical.

Trayvon asked a civil and adult question.. Why are you following me?

George was too stupid to tell him.
 
Trayvon asked a civil and adult question.. Why are you following me?

George was too stupid to tell him.

The issue is and the evidence indicates that.....M was too stupid and uncivil. M responded by repeatedly bashing Z's head against the concrete sidewalk which could have cause a severe concussion, coma or even death if Z didn't put a slug into M

Btw - there is no evidence that Z started, the physical contact
 
The issue is and the evidence indicates that.....M was too stupid and uncivil. M responded by repeatedly bashing Z's head against the concrete sidewalk which could have cause a severe concussion, coma or even death if Z didn't put a slug into M

Btw - there is no evidence that Z started, the physical contact

George grabbed at Trayvon when Trayvon turned to walk away.
 
Back
Top Bottom