Police: Zimmerman says Trayvon decked him with one blow then began hammering his head

Black_Samson · March 2012

none of this bullshit matters cause the police told zimmerman not to take his ass over there messin with him.
he aint listen, therefore he is to be held accountable for everything that took place after he climbed his ass out his vehicle.

anything and everything else is a damn distraction.

and they aint gon find him, hell they can't even find Casey Anthony and the bitch is taunting them.

tru_m.a.c · March 2012

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

I dont see Zimmermann winning this one, sorry. If he is lucky it will be manslaughter,

dude manslaughter? hmmm I gotta think this through....

In Florida, manslaughter, defined as: The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder . . . is a second degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in state prison regardless of whether the act may have been intentional or not.[2] If manslaughter is committed upon a child via culpable negligence under FL statute 827.03(3), then the crime is aggravated manslaughter of a child which is a first degree felony punishable by up to 30 years in state prison.[3] The penalty is the same if it is committed upon the elderly or disabled. Also, under the 10-20-Life system, if a firearm is used in any way then the penalty will be raised to the next degree.[4]

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

if not he will be charged with a hate crime.

"They are going to have to show he was specifically targeting this individual based on his race, creed, color, et cetera," said David S. Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor in Miami. "Not that he was chasing somebody down and got in a confrontation that may or may not have been based on that."

And if nobody else can corroborate that he hated blacks you're REALLY swinging for the fences. More evidence we gotta wait and see.

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

His testimony doesnt make sense, how can you shoot someone sitting on top of you and beating you? The fight must have been over when he shot him, if he really shot him in self defense there must be substantial traces of Martin's blood on his clothes and moreover he must prove that he feared for his life, which is hard considering the fact that Martin was on his own and unarmed.

And we dont even know which injuries Martin took away from the fight. If there is any forensic evidence hinting that Zimmermann might have altered the story a little, he is done.

Honestly thats what I'm waiting for. His play by play break down of the situation.

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

One could argue that there is enough corroborative evidence already, the 911 call protocol makes it clear that Trayvon tried to avoid any confrontation, this is confirmed by the testimony of his girlfriend, whereas Zimmermann was clearly pursuing him and even hinted at making sure "this asshole" won't get away. Let's not even talk about "fucking coon"...

and this is the brick wall you folks keep running into

you cannot link the action of getting out of the car with the intent to kill

the only thing that shows an intent to kill would be the sequence of events when they meet up

BlackGerald · March 2012

Notice how Zimmerman does mention anything about Martin trying to steal from him? What motive does Martin have in allegedly attacking Zimmerman?

Elzo69Revolutions · March 2012

Anything that transpired once Trayvon is confronted is irrelevant. The case is built prior to the verbal and possible physical confrontation.

bgoat · March 2012

How was Trayvon reaching for your gun, and bashing your head at the sametime?

Du_Du · March 2012

i link the intent to kill with these things as i 've said before

1. the statement "they always get away with it" - it shows frustration that can lead a reasonable person and a jury that he was intending to handle this himself

2. the police were called "he knew the police were on their way, and hung up, again you can sway the jury to know that he had a short window of time in order to handle this as he knew they were on their way

3. he got out of the car with the gun, -any claim to say he was just trying to identify the boy for when the police cam is thrown out the window simply because you don't need a gun to identify. when going back to the first statement it can be believe that he intended to handle this himself

4. with all the other things mentioned he still approached the kid,...not only could he not wait to get off the phone to make his approach, he ignored the request to not do so....he wanted to approach the kid, and being that he had a gun on him, he knew the police were on their way, and he ignored a request to not follow, what reasonable explanation could he give to as why he personally made contact to approach the boy?

i'm not lawyer, but i feel someone with experince in swaying jury's could paint that picture of intent with jsut that clearly..

Elzo69Revolutions · March 2012

Zimmerman gonna fuck around and hire Keanu reeves s character from the devils Advocate..

a.mann · March 2012

the hard truth of the matter is we will likely never know what took place,

the devil cops in that town corrupted case damn near beyond repair

smh

on another note,
been flippin throw stations of Conservative radio

and they are straight destorying Obama for his statement on this

-Vincenzo- · March 2012

tru_m.a.c wrote: »

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

I dont see Zimmermann winning this one, sorry. If he is lucky it will be manslaughter,

dude manslaughter? hmmm I gotta think this through....

In Florida, manslaughter, defined as: The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder . . . is a second degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in state prison regardless of whether the act may have been intentional or not.[2] If manslaughter is committed upon a child via culpable negligence under FL statute 827.03(3), then the crime is aggravated manslaughter of a child which is a first degree felony punishable by up to 30 years in state prison.[3] The penalty is the same if it is committed upon the elderly or disabled. Also, under the 10-20-Life system, if a firearm is used in any way then the penalty will be raised to the next degree.[4]

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

if not he will be charged with a hate crime.

"They are going to have to show he was specifically targeting this individual based on his race, creed, color, et cetera," said David S. Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor in Miami. "Not that he was chasing somebody down and got in a confrontation that may or may not have been based on that."

And if nobody else can corroborate that he hated blacks you're REALLY swinging for the fences. More evidence we gotta wait and see.

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

His testimony doesnt make sense, how can you shoot someone sitting on top of you and beating you? The fight must have been over when he shot him, if he really shot him in self defense there must be substantial traces of Martin's blood on his clothes and moreover he must prove that he feared for his life, which is hard considering the fact that Martin was on his own and unarmed.

And we dont even know which injuries Martin took away from the fight. If there is any forensic evidence hinting that Zimmermann might have altered the story a little, he is done.

Honestly thats what I'm waiting for. His play by play break down of the situation.

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

One could argue that there is enough corroborative evidence already, the 911 call protocol makes it clear that Trayvon tried to avoid any confrontation, this is confirmed by the testimony of his girlfriend, whereas Zimmermann was clearly pursuing him and even hinted at making sure "this asshole" won't get away. Let's not even talk about "fucking coon"...

and this is the brick wall you folks keep running into

you cannot link the action of getting out of the car with the intent to kill

the only thing that shows an intent to kill would be the sequence of events when they meet up

You only need to prove intent to kill for a murder charge, I was talking about manslaughter which falls under chapter 782: Homicide of Florida's law, not as you quoted 776.

782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.—
(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2010/782.07

Regarding the hate crime charge, this is what Donald Tibbs, a Drexel University law professor who has closely studied race, civil rights and criminal procedure says:

“It sounds pretty obvious to me, if that was a racial epithet that preceded the attack on Trayvon Martin, we definitely have a hate crime.”
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/25/zimmerman-could-be-charged-with-hate-crime-in-trayvon-martin-shooting/

The fact that Zimmermann pursued Martin while he was running and also stated his discontent with the fact that "these assholes always get away" paired with the testimony of Martin's girlfriend will be used as circumstantial evidence in court.

Should forensic investigation only reveal one small inconsistency in Zimmermann's claims, like for example no blood of Martin on his shirt, it's a wrap for that guy.

Google "Corroborating evidence" and close the case homeboy

GSonII · March 2012

So,even if he got his ass beat then decided to shoot I don't think that is self-defense. That's why he added the part about the kid going for the gun. Just seems like he provoked a fight got one, got something he didn't want and decided to shoot because he had a gun. My dad always told me, don't carry a gun because you will use it. That is all this was, if he did not have a gun he would have just had to take that ass whooping.

GSonII · March 2012

[

tru_m.a.c · March 2012

Elzo69Reloaded wrote: »

Anything that transpired once Trayvon is confronted is irrelevant. The case is built prior to the verbal and possible physical confrontation.

no. it doesn't

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

tru_m.a.c wrote: »

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

I dont see Zimmermann winning this one, sorry. If he is lucky it will be manslaughter,

dude manslaughter? hmmm I gotta think this through....

In Florida, manslaughter, defined as: The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder . . . is a second degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in state prison regardless of whether the act may have been intentional or not.[2] If manslaughter is committed upon a child via culpable negligence under FL statute 827.03(3), then the crime is aggravated manslaughter of a child which is a first degree felony punishable by up to 30 years in state prison.[3] The penalty is the same if it is committed upon the elderly or disabled. Also, under the 10-20-Life system, if a firearm is used in any way then the penalty will be raised to the next degree.[4]

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

if not he will be charged with a hate crime.

"They are going to have to show he was specifically targeting this individual based on his race, creed, color, et cetera," said David S. Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor in Miami. "Not that he was chasing somebody down and got in a confrontation that may or may not have been based on that."

And if nobody else can corroborate that he hated blacks you're REALLY swinging for the fences. More evidence we gotta wait and see.

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

His testimony doesnt make sense, how can you shoot someone sitting on top of you and beating you? The fight must have been over when he shot him, if he really shot him in self defense there must be substantial traces of Martin's blood on his clothes and moreover he must prove that he feared for his life, which is hard considering the fact that Martin was on his own and unarmed.

And we dont even know which injuries Martin took away from the fight. If there is any forensic evidence hinting that Zimmermann might have altered the story a little, he is done.

Honestly thats what I'm waiting for. His play by play break down of the situation.

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

One could argue that there is enough corroborative evidence already, the 911 call protocol makes it clear that Trayvon tried to avoid any confrontation, this is confirmed by the testimony of his girlfriend, whereas Zimmermann was clearly pursuing him and even hinted at making sure "this asshole" won't get away. Let's not even talk about "fucking coon"...

and this is the brick wall you folks keep running into

you cannot link the action of getting out of the car with the intent to kill

the only thing that shows an intent to kill would be the sequence of events when they meet up

You only need to prove intent to kill for a murder charge, I was talking about manslaughter which falls under chapter 782: Homicide of Florida's law, not as you quoted 776.

782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.—
(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2010/782.07

Regarding the hate crime charge, this is what Donald Tibbs, a Drexel University law professor who has closely studied race, civil rights and criminal procedure says:

“It sounds pretty obvious to me, if that was a racial epithet that preceded the attack on Trayvon Martin, we definitely have a hate crime.”
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/25/zimmerman-could-be-charged-with-hate-crime-in-trayvon-martin-shooting/

The fact that Zimmermann pursued Martin while he was running and also stated his discontent with the fact that "these assholes always get away" paired with the testimony of Martin's girlfriend will be used as circumstantial evidence in court.

Should forensic investigation only reveal one small inconsistency in Zimmermann's claims, like for example no blood of Martin on his shirt, it's a wrap for that guy.

Google "Corroborating evidence" and close the case homeboy

dude intent DESTROYS your case....go back and check the previous cases that I copied and pasted....neither one of those would pass your belief in "intent" yet they have

why??? because your case hangs on the belief that once Zimmerman steps out of that car, his intent is to physical harm Trayvon. Intent to cause physical harm is very different from the intent to create reconnaissance for the cops.

You have no case unless you see the written sequence of events that started the fight

I don't know what state you're from. But from my perspective, in NYC this case would be closed last week. Why? Because my interpretation of law has a NY bias. So to me it makes absolutely no sense how this law even gets on the books, but in florida this very same case happens over and over and over again. And like the statistics prove, it rarely ends up with a criminal conviction.

If you can't convince a juror that he says "coon" in that video, your hate crime case is OVER. Thats 1 piece of evidence and you're trying to "convince" ppl of it. Whenever you have to convince ppl of evidence, that means its weak.

I don't know why supporters don't understand this simple thing. Zimmerman leaving the jeep does not equate to Zimmerman intending to cause bodily harm. It means Zimmerman was fuckn STUPID.

-Vincenzo- · March 2012

tru_m.a.c wrote: »

Elzo69Reloaded wrote: »

Anything that transpired once Trayvon is confronted is irrelevant. The case is built prior to the verbal and possible physical confrontation.

no. it doesn't

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

tru_m.a.c wrote: »

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

I dont see Zimmermann winning this one, sorry. If he is lucky it will be manslaughter,

dude manslaughter? hmmm I gotta think this through....

In Florida, manslaughter, defined as: The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder . . . is a second degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in state prison regardless of whether the act may have been intentional or not.[2] If manslaughter is committed upon a child via culpable negligence under FL statute 827.03(3), then the crime is aggravated manslaughter of a child which is a first degree felony punishable by up to 30 years in state prison.[3] The penalty is the same if it is committed upon the elderly or disabled. Also, under the 10-20-Life system, if a firearm is used in any way then the penalty will be raised to the next degree.[4]

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

if not he will be charged with a hate crime.

"They are going to have to show he was specifically targeting this individual based on his race, creed, color, et cetera," said David S. Weinstein, a former federal prosecutor in Miami. "Not that he was chasing somebody down and got in a confrontation that may or may not have been based on that."

And if nobody else can corroborate that he hated blacks you're REALLY swinging for the fences. More evidence we gotta wait and see.

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

His testimony doesnt make sense, how can you shoot someone sitting on top of you and beating you? The fight must have been over when he shot him, if he really shot him in self defense there must be substantial traces of Martin's blood on his clothes and moreover he must prove that he feared for his life, which is hard considering the fact that Martin was on his own and unarmed.

And we dont even know which injuries Martin took away from the fight. If there is any forensic evidence hinting that Zimmermann might have altered the story a little, he is done.

Honestly thats what I'm waiting for. His play by play break down of the situation.

-Vincenzo- wrote: »

One could argue that there is enough corroborative evidence already, the 911 call protocol makes it clear that Trayvon tried to avoid any confrontation, this is confirmed by the testimony of his girlfriend, whereas Zimmermann was clearly pursuing him and even hinted at making sure "this asshole" won't get away. Let's not even talk about "fucking coon"...

and this is the brick wall you folks keep running into

you cannot link the action of getting out of the car with the intent to kill

the only thing that shows an intent to kill would be the sequence of events when they meet up

You only need to prove intent to kill for a murder charge, I was talking about manslaughter which falls under chapter 782: Homicide of Florida's law, not as you quoted 776.

782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.—
(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2010/782.07

Regarding the hate crime charge, this is what Donald Tibbs, a Drexel University law professor who has closely studied race, civil rights and criminal procedure says:

“It sounds pretty obvious to me, if that was a racial epithet that preceded the attack on Trayvon Martin, we definitely have a hate crime.”
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/25/zimmerman-could-be-charged-with-hate-crime-in-trayvon-martin-shooting/

The fact that Zimmermann pursued Martin while he was running and also stated his discontent with the fact that "these assholes always get away" paired with the testimony of Martin's girlfriend will be used as circumstantial evidence in court.

Should forensic investigation only reveal one small inconsistency in Zimmermann's claims, like for example no blood of Martin on his shirt, it's a wrap for that guy.

Google "Corroborating evidence" and close the case homeboy

dude intent DESTROYS your case....go back and check the previous cases that I copied and pasted....neither one of those would pass your belief in "intent" yet they have

why??? because your case hangs on the belief that once Zimmerman steps out of that car, his intent is to physical harm Trayvon. Intent to cause physical harm is very different from the intent to create reconnaissance for the cops.

You have no case unless you see the written sequence of events that started the fight

I don't know what state you're from. But from my perspective, in NYC this case would be closed last week. Why? Because my interpretation of law has a NY bias. So to me it makes absolutely no sense how this law even gets on the books, but in florida this very same case happens over and over and over again. And like the statistics prove, it rarely ends up with a criminal conviction.

If you can't convince a juror that he says "coon" in that video, your hate crime case is OVER. Thats 1 piece of evidence and you're trying to "convince" ppl of it. Whenever you have to convince ppl of evidence, that means its weak.

I don't know why supporters don't understand this simple thing. Zimmerman leaving the jeep does not equate to Zimmerman intending to cause bodily harm. It means Zimmerman was fuckn STUPID.

I still dont claim Zimmermann had any intent to attack Martin when he stepped out of his Jeep but it the fact that he followed him takes away his self-defense/stand your ground claim (and maybe justifies Martin's use of bodily force under the same regulation at the same time). If he had intent he could be charged with 1st or 2nd degree murder, that's the difference to manslaughter.

But since no one can prove any intent, following April 10th meeting he will be only charged with manslaughter, you can bet on this one bro

loch121 · March 2012

This dude guilty because he approached dude.There has to be a real reason to believe your life is in danger for self defense.Maybe Trayvon did get the best of him, but it was his life really in danger.He was like 10 yrs older than Trayvon and looks stocky.If Trayvon really got the best of him he should at least get manslaughter like when ppl get in bar fights and kill the other fighter by mistake.

Black_Samson · March 2012

@Vincenzo

Manslaughter is good enough.
just get him into the bing, karma will do the rest.
he's a mutt spic with a jew name, he has no protection.

-Vincenzo- · March 2012

who does honestly think, Sanford officials will hold a press conference on April 10th saying we wont charge Zimmermann with anything?!?

They dont give a fuck about Zimmermann to risk any unrest because of this guy, give him 8 years for manslaughter, black people will gripe a little that the sentence is not enough and then america k.i.m.

let's be reality for one second brehs

Elzo69Revolutions · March 2012

Thulsa Doom wrote: »

@Vincenzo

Manslaughter is good enough.
just get him into the bing, karma will do the rest.
he's a mutt spic with a jew name, he has no protection.

lmao.....

alvarez_313 · March 2012

I personally think with the spate of break in's that had occurred previously he had every intention of "making an example" out of Trayvon that night. And he pretty much expected to get a pat on the back from the law enforcement community which seems to be what was taking place before the situation garnered national attention. I bet he had that gun in hand during his whole "pursuit" of Trayvon. Now they want to drag out this one black friend of his all over television, how convenient is that.. As far as the marijuana thing and the school suspension I don't see how any of that is even a factor in this situation.

desertrain10 · March 2012

alvarez_313 wrote: »

I personally think with the spate of break in's that had occurred previously he had every intention of "making an example" out of Trayvon that night. And he pretty much expected to get a pat on the back from the law enforcement community which seems to be what was taking place before the situation garnered national attention. I bet he had that gun in hand during his whole "pursuit" of Trayvon. Now they want to drag out this one black friend of his all over television, how convenient is that.. As far as the marijuana thing and the school suspension I don't see how any of that is even a factor in this situation.

right, its more than probable that zimmerman had his gun in his hand the whole time

and like others have pointed out trayvon supposedly was shot from close range...but there's no mention of blood on zimmerman's clothing in the police report which is highly telling... there's mention of his shirt being wet and covered in grass however there's no mention of blood....that's not nothing you would just leave out a police report

here's link to initial police report....http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/Twin Lakes Shooting Initial Report.pdf

-Vincenzo- · March 2012

desertrain10 wrote: »

alvarez_313 wrote: »

I personally think with the spate of break in's that had occurred previously he had every intention of "making an example" out of Trayvon that night. And he pretty much expected to get a pat on the back from the law enforcement community which seems to be what was taking place before the situation garnered national attention. I bet he had that gun in hand during his whole "pursuit" of Trayvon. Now they want to drag out this one black friend of his all over television, how convenient is that.. As far as the marijuana thing and the school suspension I don't see how any of that is even a factor in this situation.

right, its more than probable that zimmerman had his gun in his hand the whole time

and like others have pointed out trayvon supposedly was shot from close range...but there's no mention of blood on zimmerman's clothing in the police report which is highly telling... there's mention of his shirt being wet and covered in grass however there's no mention of blood....that's not nothing you would just leave out a police report

here's link to initial police report....http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/Twin Lakes Shooting Initial Report.pdf

good drop

OhPee · March 2012

he was following him because he was a neighborhood watch guy. don't they have all the right to know whats going on in the neighborhood?

OhPee · March 2012

Trayvon shouldn't have gotten killed. I totally agree with that. Having him shot at point blank range was completely unnecessary. I just don't like the media making it seem that Trayvon was such a sweet and innocent child who wouldn't hurt a fly. They use that photo of him wearing the Hollister shirt, which looks like when he was about 12. A 17 year old Trayvon was 6'3", great shape with tatoos who smoked and apparently dealt weed. He had a history of fighting people in school. He swung on his bus driver which is I believe a reason why he was suspended from school.

My point being that even though he did not deserve to die, I bet he was a hot head. His ego got in the way when Zimmerman kept staring at him and he needed to act tough and tell him "what are you staring at". Just because Zimmerman is like 11 years older, doesn't mean he can't get his ass beat by a 17 year old. Zimmerman is a neighborhood watch guy, so I think he had a right to look at him up until the dispatcher on the phone told him to stop. Trayvon was just at the wrong place at the wrong time. If you listen to Zimmerman's phone call to 911, he wasn't even sure that Trayvon was black at first.

Zimmerman should have simply
1) waited for the cops by the mailboxes like he said he would
2) stop eyeing Trayvon when dispatcher told him he did not need to do that

idk, to me it was a "when keeping it real goes wrong" situations.

What's interesting to me is when you listen to that 911 call from that woman saying someone is outside her home........you hear someone crying for help in the background. Me personally, I think it would be Trayvon because it is a high pitched cry. Makes Zimmerman seem like a bitch if indeed that is him lol

OhPee · March 2012

OhPee wrote: »

Trayvon shouldn't have gotten killed. I totally agree with that. Having him shot at point blank range was completely unnecessary. I just don't like the media making it seem that Trayvon was such a sweet and innocent child who wouldn't hurt a fly. They use that photo of him wearing the Hollister shirt, which looks like when he was about 12. A 17 year old Trayvon was 6'3", great shape with tatoos who smoked and apparently dealt weed. He had a history of fighting people in school. He swung on his bus driver which is I believe a reason why he was suspended from school.

My point being that even though he did not deserve to die, I bet he was a hot head. His ego got in the way when Zimmerman kept staring at him and he needed to act tough and tell him "what are you staring at". Just because Zimmerman is like 11 years older, doesn't mean he can't get his ass beat by a 17 year old. Zimmerman is a neighborhood watch guy, so I think he had a right to look at him up until the dispatcher on the phone told him to stop. Trayvon was just at the wrong place at the wrong time. If you listen to Zimmerman's phone call to 911, he wasn't even sure that Trayvon was black at first.

Zimmerman should have simply
1) waited for the cops by the mailboxes like he said he would
2) stop eyeing Trayvon when dispatcher told him he did not need to do that

idk, to me it was a "when keeping it real goes wrong" situations.

What's interesting to me is when you listen to that 911 call from that woman saying someone is outside her home........you hear someone crying for help in the background. Me personally, I think it would be Trayvon because it is a high pitched cry. Makes Zimmerman seem like a bitch if indeed that is him lol

OhPee · March 2012

don't know how to delete that ^^

Black_Samson · March 2012

regardless of every bit of mud slinging from both sides one thing is true.
He was told to stay put.
He disregarded the lawful order and a kid was killed, ultimately he is responsible.

lets all remember that.
none of the other shit matters, because this one fact remains.

He was told to stay put.
None of this would even be happening if he would have just stayed put.
Trayvon would have just been another nigga that thinks "them white folk always fucking with me", getting harassed on a bogus call, but he'd be ALIVE.
and zimmerman would still be... zimmerman instead of whoever the fuck he is now. face/off

AllHipHop.com

Forums

Police: Zimmerman says Trayvon decked him with one blow then began hammering his head

Replies