So, you're saying Martin didn't have the right to defend himself against somebody that was following him? self defense works both ways.

Hmmm - let's see: George Zimmerman bought a new passport two weeks after the killing just because he liked the way the photo looked? And he lied about losing the original passport because .....? And he set up the website (that his original lawyers didn't know about at first) to raise money because ...? Don't dump on Zimmerman? Of course I won't, I'll just laugh my a-- off that he is stupid enough to make himself look like a guilty man who was putting things in place to flee the country. It sounds like the FULL STORY certainly is coming out. Ha ha ha ha.

By the way - if I'm ever in legal trouble, I hope I'll have $135,000 and still get to call myself indigent. Not a chance! And Zimmerman got caught. Good!!!

zimmerman is a liar, bud.

you think its OK for him to have a second passport, and a rainy day stash?

get real.

What Zimmerman was doing at the time of the incident was commendable. He was trying to keep his neighborhood safe.However how many times have you heard the police tell citizens to call 911 before trying to apprehend a suspect yourself. How did Trayvon Martin know Zimmerman was not some pervert trying to pick him up or do him harm.But Zimmerman took it upon himself to go after the young man,even after police told him not to.If I had a strange man following me on a dark rainy night I would fight back before he could do me harm.The confrontation should never have happened,but it did because a vigilante with a holster full of courage went after a young man with a can of iced tea and a bag full of skittles,and now the young man is dead.

Joca,

with all due respect, this wanna-be cop used his "neighborhood watch" title as a reason to carry a gun and and eventually kill an innocent teenager.

his self-appointed "neighborhood watch" position apparently gave this hapless, spoiled, irresponsible loser power, power that HE GAVE HIMSELF AND TOOK TOO FAR.

he didn't care about the safety of his neighborhood that much. he was a bigot who wanted to know what it felt like to kill.

my humble opinion as always.

He was also outside his neighborhood. And neighborhood watch people are not alowed to carry fire arms. That was stated by 2 other neighborhood watch people. He followed Trayvon in his vehicle after being told not to, and then on foot after being told to stay in his vehicle. Very comenable. NOT

Zimmy's a coward in his call to the cops he said he thought he was a teen he changed his story in his the courtroom and said he thought he was about his age. He agreed not to follow Martin but did and was told he didn't need to do that (the way in which things where worded from the cops was in such a way to protect Zimmy and the cops) He did pursue Martin with a gun. Its perfectly clear that Martin didn't have anything stolen and Zimmy had no evidence to even lead him to believe so. Zimmy was the one who made this confrontation with gun on him,loaded! Trayvon may have realised that this gunman may pursue him and ran and hid. And when he saw that the gunman indeed did may have tried to protect the home from the gunman's knowledge of it by defending it. None of the injury's the killer sustained were in no way life threatening. I believe Zimmerman intention was solely to kill this unarmed teen fueled by his hatred of blacks, also in his call Zimmy made derogatory references saying these a$$holes and goons.

Yes, sure. A guy with no gun and a guy with a gun. Self defense. Right. Sure. If I have a gun and you have a fist, I can blast you because I fear you might hurt me with your fists. God...

What Zimmerman was doing at the time of the incident was commendable. He was trying to keep his neighborhood safe.However how many times have you heard the police tell citizens to call 911 before trying to apprehend a suspect yourself. How did Trayvon Martin know Zimmerman was not some pervert trying to pick him up or do him harm.But Zimmerman took it upon himself to go after the young man,even after police told him not to.If I had a strange man following me on a dark rainy night I would fight back before he could do me harm.The confrontation should never have happened,but it did because a vigilante with a holster full of courage went after a young man with a can of iced tea and a bag full of skittles,and now the young man is dead.

Absolutely could not have said it better myself. Self defense and threat of harm works both ways. Zimmerman can't claim he was too dumb to understand his actions could have gone bad. Ignorance is not a legal defense.

Get Bent. He knew what type of situation he put his self in. Before the police came he busted his own head and punched himself in the nose. He is just that type of goober who I wouldn't put it past. He asked for and tried for a different outcome that didn't happen and now it's time to face the consequences!

didn't the medical report say he had black eyes and a broken nose? i didn't see any of that on the police video. didn't his brother or father say he couldn't stop crying? i didn't see any of that on the video of him at the police station either.

the injuries he had to back of his head do not represent those of "being slammed on the sidewalk repeatedly within a hair of unconciousness, so close to unconciousness that one more slam would have had him in diapers, and being spoon-fed by his brother" (paraphrased statement by brother robert). where were the bruises and abrasions one would expect with that type of attack? he sure seemed to be getting around the police station pretty well for having a concussion within an inch of his life.

he didn't look like he was in pain to me. he looked like a "proud peacock" finally getting done what he thought needed to be done. he looked like, "hey, now i'm one of you, or maybe i'm even BETTER than you-i got rid of a n----r".

his injuries would have been much worse were he within an inch of his life.

i am giving benefit of the doubt to the one who cannot speak.

The bleeding hearts in this country do not believe that a minor has a right to defend himself against an adult male who is stalking him with an unknown intent - perhaps to mug, rape or kill him. These pro-criminal, anti-victim liberal wingnuts want your children to dutifully allow adult males to follow them, question them, rape them, kill them - without talking back or disrespecting them. What a country.

Sorry but I think you are suffering from some sort of delusion as it is the tea bagging republicans that are saying that Z had every right to shoot a minor not those on the left.

You mean like not turning in your second passport honest? Oh Z forgot he had 2 passports and authorities only asked for 1. It's all a misunderstanding after all.

Because the bleeding hearts that are defending this cop assaulting, woman beater do not want your children or mine to be able to fight back against their attackers. Let adult male stalkers rape, beat and murder our kids. Just don't fight back or disrespect them while they are doing. That will make you a thug!

He had 2 pass ports. How many fire arms?

I'll bet he's got another one. Or two. Given to him by a friend or family member.

His life's in danger. Don't want to get shot, you know.

Typical Liberal:

Ignore the Constitution

Ignore the Justice System

Prosecute people without Due Process and Evidence based on popular "opinions"

Typical whacko. Say anything that's an attack on people you don't agree with. Who cares if it makes sense, as long as it's insulting.

You guys are the one that call Zimmerman's lawyers sleazy, he'll get what he deserves in spite of our justice system and other idiotic nonsense. You all embarrass yourselves with your stupid thoughtless comments.

You don't have the sense to be embarrassed.

This from the guy who will use anything the right say to attack politicians he doesn't agree with now all of a sudden he wants facts. Right.

Oh, the poor kid had every right to be there..... Yet this same neighborhood had been burglarized by young teenagers wearing similar clothing over the past several months. Home invasions by young hoodlums. We'll see if the evidence bears out his innocence. It was amusing to see how the liberal media put out photos of Trayvon from many many years ago in an attempt to paint him as harmless when in fact he's 6' 170 pounds and had a history of causing trouble. More liberal manipulation of the truth while MSNBC edited the 911 audio tapes to pervert the truth in this case. Al Sharpton the 'race pimp' and MSNBC contributor that often hosts the Ed Show making a ruckus of racist nonsense - getting the facts wrong, as usual.

Whacko's jealous of Zimmerman. He wishes HE could kill people he doesn't like.

There you go. That's the type of liberal lunatic and extremist comment I was waiting for from you! So glad you didn't let me down.

wacko convicted Trayvon for the type of clothes he was wearing. He was walking on a public sidewalk, outside the neighborhood. But maybe you failed to see the map.

Larry:

Where have you seen anything regarding the fact that this incident took place on a public sidewalk OUTSIDE of the gated community? I would love to see that map.

You have to live in the real world to see it.

In other words...the map Larry suggests exist, doe not and his claim is just another lie on this blog. Once again, when the left gets confronted with a requirement to back up their claims with facts, the response is to attack.

Interesting strategy.

It's always worked for you.

followed by deflection...another good strategy...

Careful, CC. You're politicizing a criminal act that has nothing to do with the right wing.

When did I say politics were involved? Oh that's right I didn't I simply said the right wants people to have all types of firearms like sniper rifles or 50 cal machine guns........but gun is not a significant factor. This is because of Zimmmerman's irresponsible actions which weren't motivated by politics. That had nothing to do with the point.

"we don't need you to do that" does that means.....

1. Good work, keep going
2. cease trying to help in the manner you are doing it
3. tomato
4. Romney's a fake

Answer: door #2

If someone doesn't pass that I think it would best for everyone if those people don't have guns. Idiots+guns=bad

The right disagrees however thtat is of no importance since gun control is not the issue at hand, so there's no politics.

Once again, you can't get your facts straight, but what do you expect from a group that watches edited audio from MSDNC. It wasn't the "police" that told him not to follow Trayvon. It was the 911 dispatcher that advised him it was not necessary.

Wacko, Who the hell do you think handles the 911 calls? The local police department that's who.

Please make sure you have your facts straight...

NO ONE told him not to follow Zimmerman and NO ONE told him to get back in his car.

He was only told by the dispatcher (WHO IS NOT A POLICE OFFICER) that "we don;t need you to do that"...which the courts will decide the meaning of.

Of course, you don't have the brains to figure that complex sentence out for yourself.

typical Democrat tactic...aways attack the person when you have no other way to defeat their argument.

No storm what it amounts to is you have been told what "we don't need you to do that" means. Your problem is you don't have the intelligence to listen to others like most 2 to 14 year olds, in your mind it would have required 911 to say hey stay in your car. Reality is the courts side with 911 not you.

I guess we will find out during the trial. All I can do it report the FACTS. The FACT is that he was not old to stay in his car, nor was he told to not pursue.

You might not like them, but those are the FACTS.

That is because you are ignorant of the justice system. How do we know this, you are still trying to make the case that 911 didn't order Z to not do that. The court has already decided that Z didn't obey 911 and they are now looking at Z's self defense claim. Even Z's lawyer is not trying to make a case about what 911 told Z, that is you and you alone making that case. Those are the facts. Here is your clue, the judge did not throw the case out of court because 911's telling Z he didn't need to do that wasn't a strong enough command. It is now up to Z and his lawyer to prove Z acted in self defense despite the fact that Z ignored 911's command to not do that. Z is already being held responsible for ignoring 911. Now Z has to prove M attacked him like he told the police or if Z confronted M which lead to a fight and Z shot M because Z was on the losing side of the fight. Z gave up all rights to presumed innocent by not listening to 911 and he now has to prove he acted in self defense. Sorry but that is the law no matter how much you whine and cry about 911.

Actually, unless you can provide a link showing otherwise, there has not been any trying of the facts in the case as of yet and there has not been any motion to dismiss. the only proceeding that has taken place is a bail hearing which has now been revoked. Once Zimmerman turns himself in, there will then be another bail hearing to decide if he should be granted new bail.

I am open to changing my opinion if you can show there has been a legal ruling related to this.

Another words regardless of any information storm will keep insisting that he is right and the world is wrong. How surprising a tea bag mentality.

Please make sure you have your facts straight...

NO ONE told him not to follow Zimmerman and NO ONE told him to get back in his car.

He was only told by the dispatcher (WHO IS NOT A POLICE OFFICER) that "we don;t need you to do that"...which the courts will decide the meaning of.

I love it how you find it to be vital to claim "we don't need you to do that" is too hard for the average adult to understand even though is an unimportant aspect of the event in question. You know that statement leans to the stop not continue sign as does every rational adult. The jury will decide if this small peice is used and they will almost certainly interpret that as "stop" as any other reasonable person would.

and did the dispatcher know he was in a car? Come to think about it I'm not sure, not like that actually makes a difference just wondering.

Reality is such that it will be difficult for the defense to try and claim as you do that these words among other things were hard to understand or were arcane and vaque somehow......the defense would be foolish to bring something like that up. The prosecution will use this and other factors like the commonly understood quidelines behind neighboor watch, something Zimmerman said he was doing. Watching has rules and he didn't follow them, that was not smart. If someone intends to do this they need to do it responsibly so as to prevent things like this. Rules are rules for a reason if he wanted to go out there and play neighborhood watchmen he should have done a little research. Maybe if someone didn't die here he could skate by in some way on that but when someone dies things really change. If someone hadn't died the ignorance defense might work but this time it will almost undoubtly fall on deaf ears.

It doesn't whether it is something many do, it's not to say people don't make mistakes but when another person is killed that turns in a big god dawn mistake that there is going to be consequences.

No. You can put him on ignore so you won't see anything he posts, but that's all. He'll get himself banned eventually.

we are not hypocrites. we think georgie-boy is guilty, and it is convenient for him that Trayvon cannot tell his side of the story.

all you have to do is look at the video of him at the police station where he is strutting around like a peacock, where he does not look anywhere near unconcious to me.

he is lying to save his ass, as he has done in the past, and continues to do.

i will give benefit of doubt to the one who can no longer speak.

Storm thinks the case hinges on 911 and doesn't know that the judge has already decided that Z didn't obey. What the case is now about is if Z acted in self defense or if Z shot M because he was losing the fight and on who started the fight. storm thinks you can start fights then claim self defense because 911 did not say hey you @!$%# stay in your car.

Once again, Whom has to lie instead of telling the truth to try and make his point.. I have never said that the case hinges on 911. All I have done is stated the fact that at no time was Zimmerman told to stay in the car or told not to pursue.

None of us know who started the fight and a jury of 12 people will decide the outcome of this case based on the evidence that is provided in court. When the verdict comes in, regardless of what it is, both sides need to let it go and move on.

What evidience supporting his story the drops of blood on the back of his head which didn't require stitches or hospitalization. Seems to suggest an intense attack did not take place, atleast not to the extent the defendant alleges. So really what evidence support his story? Zimmermans story whether you realize it or not hinges on trayvon martin trying to kill him however there is no actual person who say how it started so this watch the dispatcher said line you keep throwing out is worthless.

Fact is the prosecution is not alleging anything he did before the encounter was illegal or crimes in their own right. It's that understanding this forces us to try and peice together to show what lead to the actual alleged crime. The rest is tertiary evidence that the prosecution can use to pad its case by showing Zimmerman as someone who can't follow instructions well, look at the screw up that is why is back in custody, look at the lawyers he apparently hired who were acting like press secretaries who quit because they felt he never listened to their advice like setting up this little website........so this is going to show Zimmerman can not claim he was totally anything bad could come from what he was doing, he was simply doing what he wanted in the mind of the prosecution who will try to show a pattern of numerous other similar instances.

Zimmerman's defense has to show that trayvon martin started the fight with physical evidence or that Zimmerman was completely unaware what he did was unsafe. If he can't prove either of those the defence is going to have a very hard time winning.

SHAKA...please show me anywhere that a police officer told Zimmerman not to follow Martin.

Poor storm still can't grasp that the case on what 911 told Z has already been settled since Z's first court appearance.

Once again...show me where he was told to stay in the car or told not to pursue.

Until there is a trial and the jury agrees/disagrees with either of us, the only thing we had to go by is what was actually said.

Poor Whommy still hasn't learned how to construct a properly structured and punctuated sentence.

Wrong storm that has already been decided by the court. You are just not smart enough to know that. What don't you get storm? The judge has already decided Z disobeyed 911. If what 911 had told Z wasn't considered a order the judge would have dismissed the case based on 911 telling Z "he didn't need to do that" was not a strong enough order, the judge didn't. Just because you are ignorant in legal matters is your fault not ours. Don't like my posts to bad stfu and go back to Fox News and free republic I'm sure they can use another foaming at the mouth fanatic.

What should bother you is your stupidity of the justice system. No less than educated the case is based on who had the Stand your ground defense Z or M. Funny how that escapes your limited knowledge of the justice system. With the education levels you display you really have no right to question anyone elses grammar, a lame attempt to try to discredit a poster, childish school boy behavior at its best.

What should bother you is your stupidity of the justice system. No less than educated the case is based on who had the Stand your ground defense Z or M. Funny how that escapes your limited knowledge of the justice system. With the education levels you display you really have no right to question anyone elses grammar, a lame attempt to try to discredit a poster, childish school boy behavior at its best.

In other words...it is all your supposition and guess work. Like I KNEW, there has not been any legal hearing associated with the case. thank you for showing your incompetence.

There is no proof that he wasn't told the "you don't need to do that" , because that is exactly what he was told. that is the first time you have gotten it right. Since I am not going to be in the court, your right, my opinion does not matter, nor does yours. However, a leading 911 industry magazine has reported in an editorial that they did not believe the directive from the dispatcher was clear enough.

BTW Whom, how is that research coming on your proof that Bush ran up $15 trillion in debt. I am still waiting on that one...

No storm that would be you and your belief that outside of proving Z's self defense claim that 911 call will not mean squat when it comes to Z's defense. To bad for you that you got your information out of the coloring books they give you in elementary school telling you that cops were your friends.

Wrong again storm his lawyer had him turn himself in because if Z didn't he was facing escape charges along with the 2nd degree murder charge. That you seem to believe that liberals thought Z was going to run after his lawyer turned in his second passport just shows you know nothing about liberals. There you go again with that childish Z needed direct precise orders nonsense, really all Z proved was he listened to his lawyer. Being stupid does not give anyone a free pass for murder.

If he was guilty of 2nd degree murder charges, I don't think that he would be very worried about escape charges being added to the list.

go back and read the posts on this blog to see what the lefties believe.

Unlike you I have read them all. You are putting words into peoples mouths again because you believe Z turning himself in proves he had no intentions on leaving the country, but that is as of this moment because right now Z believes he will be found innocent. What he will or would have done when he realizes that the court doesn't believe his story and his lawyer is not going to be able to do everything he promises Z behind closed doors. At this point his lawyer is laying out Z's defense and telling Z what to say or not say, as it was pointed out, Z's 911 call clearly states he thought M was a black teen but in court he said he believed M was his age, that is Z's lawyer talking for Z because it sounds better than Z knew he was stalking a teen. But again that is your assumptions. That you are trying to change the subject because your 911 claim makes you look foolish is also clear.

STORM

zimmerman would be worried about a contempt charge stemming from a failure to turn himself in because, if convicted on the murder 2 , the contempt judgment might not be considered part of the murder 2 sentence but added on top of it.

so yes his lawyers did there job to make sure he turned himself in and now will have an up hill battle to give a reason to have zimmerman released for a lower bail amount in front of the same judge.

You guys are so desperate it is pathetic...

And we get more subject change as well as an attempt at trying to discredit me. storm where is your proof the GWB didn't spend 15 trillion of borrowed money with interest?

Ok..using your logic, Obama has run up $20 trillion in borrowed money with interest...

What a loser...

STORM

you can always get a passport and fly some where.