Originally Posted by Chuck
So in the absence of fact just insert theory or assumptions? Or worse yet despite the presence
of facts insert it anyway?
So let me get this straight... Zimmerman found Martin, Martin ran and Zimmerman caught him???
Seriously? Um... have you seen the two people in question here??? So a fat out of shape Zimmerman chased and actually CAUGHT Martin????
Ok... sure... again NO evidence shows that but we've already established that things like truth, facts and evidence mean nothing to those with an agenda. So... Zimmerman catches him... what then? Martin has ZERO injuries besides the gunshot... Zimmerman has Zero marks on his hands/knuckles to indicate he ever struck Martin, even once.
Unless the position you're referring to is laying on the ground and waiting for Martin to slam his head into a sidewalk then no, he didn't.
I know facts don't matter but Zimmerman wasn't "on duty" that night and wasn't acting as part of the neighborhood watch. So while technically he was part of it he wasn't on that night.
So then he really had no reason to be following a suspicious looking kid into an apartment complex that he had NO business being at.
ps He may have not been on duty but he was definitely playing the role.
Which is it? Can't be both.
Other than starting the physical altercation by sucker punching Zimmerman in the nose,
Is this an example of facts you speak of? That's Zimmerman's tale. Just not sure I believe it.
getting on top of him, raining down punches and ultimately slamming his head into a sidewalk multiple times right???
No matter how you look at it Zimmerman went into that complex after that kid. He was captain of neighborhood watch so he knew better than to do that. He had to have a purpose for being in there. If it wasn't to confront the kid, then what?
What may have started out as vigilante justice became a case of having to defend himself. Hence, the self defense and vigilante justice both.
So suck it, Chuck!