Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Mom Confessions Mom Confessions

(Semi-Famous) Blacks who support Zimmerman's Innocence....

Posted by Anonymous   + Show Post

Yes, they do exist. There was one mom on here who said she was the only one but she is NOT.  Here ya go:

http://rollingout.com/criminal-behavior/blacks-who-support-george-zimmerman/

Posted by Anonymous on Jul. 14, 2013 at 3:29 PM
Replies (31-34):
GOBryan
by on Jul. 14, 2013 at 8:40 PM
Probably no more than TM had any right to sucker punch and then pound GZ's head into the concrete. In fact, if he did threaten GZ's life, which we're unsure of and did sucker punch him and we know he slammed his head into the concrete because it was consistent with the injuries, then GZ had more of a right to shoot him than TM had a right to sucker punch him which is why he got off. It's called self-defense. If it didn't occur that way then he probably did not. You have someone beat the crap out of you and see what you might do. It's likely that you will defend yourself however possible. The kid wasn't doing anything that night other than taking the opportunity to fight that presented itself but he was pretty much a border line thug. GZ, I'm sure is no saint either. They both made mistakes.
Quoting Anonymous:

Still does not give GZ the right to shoot somebody.

Quoting GOBryan:

Again, it doesn't matter if he got out of his car. It doesn't matter if he suspected him. What matters is that TM, if he physically threw the first punch, the didn't have any right there either. Just because you are being followed doesn't mean you can physically attack someone, otherwise, it would have been an open and shut case, which it wasn't. His penchant for fighting is what got him killed. You can say what you want about the case but Zimmerman is still found not guilty and Martin is dead because he confronted the wrong guy.

Quoting Anonymous:

Still does not give GZ the right to shoot him. GZ shot TM in the back so he cannot say that was self defense, he shot him because he was mad he got his ass beat by a young guy. He should NOT have got out of his car to confront him no matter what. He could have followed TM all the way to his apt and told the police where he went when they got there. He could have took a different action but ue decided to do the wrong one therefore he should have been found guilty.



Quoting GOBryan:

I agree with them. I think GZ had a reason to believe that this person was scoping the neighborhood and fit the description of those who have burglarized in the past so he watched and called police. He had a legit reason for doing so. 

The problem occurred with the altercation after the fact. Not the vigil. Further, like I've said before, I do believe the Dispatcher gave him a reason to believe it was ok when he said "Let me know if he does anything else" however, the media and civil rights activist only bring up the dispatcher's comment where he stated "You don't need to do that." 

TM had a knack for fighting and enjoyed it, which did come up in the text messages and comments from friends. TM planned on obtaining a gun, according to text messages. Now, I wonder, why would someone his age need a gun. If he would have picked up a gun, at his age, it would have been illegal. 

There's little doubt that he was leading himself into greater problems in life, despite his parents' attempts.  His mother sent him to his father's for the summer because he was suspended from school and I'm guessing, going down the wrong track. He may have eventually killed someone or been killed.  I don't think he went out looking for trouble but I do think that if the opportunity offered itself to fighting, he was going to take it and so it appears he did. 

Anonymous
by Anonymous on Jul. 14, 2013 at 9:09 PM
TM hit GZ because he was chasing him. Hell I would have did the same. GZ should not have chased him, he should have kept back and watched him then let the police know what was going on when they got there. All of this could have been avoided but GZ decided to take a risk not knowing who this person was or what he was capable of. GZ got what he desreved but TM should not have died. All white people say he was a border line thug or was a thug. Just because he smoked weed and "looks" suspicious does not make him a thug. Thug or not he did not deserve to die.

Quoting GOBryan:

Probably no more than TM had any right to sucker punch and then pound GZ's head into the concrete. In fact, if he did threaten GZ's life, which we're unsure of and did sucker punch him and we know he slammed his head into the concrete because it was consistent with the injuries, then GZ had more of a right to shoot him than TM had a right to sucker punch him which is why he got off. It's called self-defense. If it didn't occur that way then he probably did not. You have someone beat the crap out of you and see what you might do. It's likely that you will defend yourself however possible.

The kid wasn't doing anything that night other than taking the opportunity to fight that presented itself but he was pretty much a border line thug. GZ, I'm sure is no saint either. They both made mistakes.

Quoting Anonymous:

Still does not give GZ the right to shoot somebody.



Quoting GOBryan:

Again, it doesn't matter if he got out of his car. It doesn't matter if he suspected him. What matters is that TM, if he physically threw the first punch, the didn't have any right there either. Just because you are being followed doesn't mean you can physically attack someone, otherwise, it would have been an open and shut case, which it wasn't. His penchant for fighting is what got him killed. You can say what you want about the case but Zimmerman is still found not guilty and Martin is dead because he confronted the wrong guy.



Quoting Anonymous:

Still does not give GZ the right to shoot him. GZ shot TM in the back so he cannot say that was self defense, he shot him because he was mad he got his ass beat by a young guy. He should NOT have got out of his car to confront him no matter what. He could have followed TM all the way to his apt and told the police where he went when they got there. He could have took a different action but ue decided to do the wrong one therefore he should have been found guilty.





Quoting GOBryan:

I agree with them. I think GZ had a reason to believe that this person was scoping the neighborhood and fit the description of those who have burglarized in the past so he watched and called police. He had a legit reason for doing so. 

The problem occurred with the altercation after the fact. Not the vigil. Further, like I've said before, I do believe the Dispatcher gave him a reason to believe it was ok when he said "Let me know if he does anything else" however, the media and civil rights activist only bring up the dispatcher's comment where he stated "You don't need to do that." 

TM had a knack for fighting and enjoyed it, which did come up in the text messages and comments from friends. TM planned on obtaining a gun, according to text messages. Now, I wonder, why would someone his age need a gun. If he would have picked up a gun, at his age, it would have been illegal. 

There's little doubt that he was leading himself into greater problems in life, despite his parents' attempts.  His mother sent him to his father's for the summer because he was suspended from school and I'm guessing, going down the wrong track. He may have eventually killed someone or been killed.  I don't think he went out looking for trouble but I do think that if the opportunity offered itself to fighting, he was going to take it and so it appears he did. 

GOBryan
by on Jul. 14, 2013 at 9:22 PM

You can't strike someone because you're being followed. They stopped long enough to exchange words, so there was likely no reason to physically assault GZ. TM had a tenacity and tendency to fight based on witness account and text messages. He liked to fight. I never even mentioned the pot because I don't think it's a big deal and I've never smoked pot or cigs for that matter. He's a borderline thug because he liked to fight. GZ had a reason to suspect because there was a slew of break ins caused by young black males fittings TM's description. THAT is why he was suspicious. TM wasn't from the neighborhood and was apparently just hanging out, which he had a right to do but GZ also had a right to suspect. He wasn't even sure if he was black and when dispatch asked, he said he thinks he's black and then confirmed it showing that wasn't the reason he was suspicious. The reality is that if they would have TALKED it out, it would have been the end of that. TM would have walked home just a few feet away and GZ would have been on his way to Target. Plain and simple,however, TM apparently saw an opportunity to fight. THAT is was resulted in the death and not because GZ called police, followed or was suspicious in any way. If that were the case, he could have pulled his gun LONG before that and avoided the beating, which he didn't.

That's why I say they were both wrong but what lead to the death was indeed the altercation, not the following nor was that illegal in itself. 

Quoting Anonymous:

TM hit GZ because he was chasing him. Hell I would have did the same. GZ should not have chased him, he should have kept back and watched him then let the police know what was going on when they got there. All of this could have been avoided but GZ decided to take a risk not knowing who this person was or what he was capable of. GZ got what he desreved but TM should not have died. All white people say he was a border line thug or was a thug. Just because he smoked weed and "looks" suspicious does not make him a thug. Thug or not he did not deserve to die.

Quoting GOBryan:

Probably no more than TM had any right to sucker punch and then pound GZ's head into the concrete. In fact, if he did threaten GZ's life, which we're unsure of and did sucker punch him and we know he slammed his head into the concrete because it was consistent with the injuries, then GZ had more of a right to shoot him than TM had a right to sucker punch him which is why he got off. It's called self-defense. If it didn't occur that way then he probably did not. You have someone beat the crap out of you and see what you might do. It's likely that you will defend yourself however possible.

Anonymous
by Anonymous on Jul. 14, 2013 at 10:01 PM
You're arguing over a sociopath that doesn't give two fucks about human life. Good for you. I hope you put this much effort into educating yourself and getting degrees in order to advance your life.


Quoting idee:

 I looked up what you said and it is not true. Try being proud of what you say and stand beside it, otherwise I am going to consider it a lie. Anon is a cowards way of writing.


Quoting Anonymous:

Zimmerman had a restraining order against him by his ex fiancé for beating her with a bat. He had to flee Virginia because of rape allegations and molestation of a 6 year old. He also got into a bar scuffle with an undercover cop. Why don't you check his background too before bashing Trayvon. But since zimmermans daddy is a respected judge you never hear about these things, he swept them under the rug for his loser son because he was an embarrassment to the family. Zimmerman has a pattern of destructive behavior. The fact that he showed zero emotion when the verdict was read indicates he's a sociopath. He will get caught doing something eventually. His time will come. Just like OJ Simpson and Joran VanDerSloot.



Quoting GOBryan:


I agree with them. I think GZ had a reason to believe that this person was scoping the neighborhood and fit the description of those who have burglarized in the past so he watched and called police. He had a legit reason for doing so. 


The problem occurred with the altercation after the fact. Not the vigil. Further, like I've said before, I do believe the Dispatcher gave him a reason to believe it was ok when he said "Let me know if he does anything else" however, the media and civil rights activist only bring up the dispatcher's comment where he stated "You don't need to do that." 


TM had a knack for fighting and enjoyed it, which did come up in the text messages and comments from friends. TM planned on obtaining a gun, according to text messages. Now, I wonder, why would someone his age need a gun. If he would have picked up a gun, at his age, it would have been illegal. 


There's little doubt that he was leading himself into greater problems in life, despite his parents' attempts.  His mother sent him to his father's for the summer because he was suspended from school and I'm guessing, going down the wrong track. He may have eventually killed someone or been killed.  I don't think he went out looking for trouble but I do think that if the opportunity offered itself to fighting, he was going to take it and so it appears he did. 



 


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)