|
Nosathro -> RE: Update on Trayvon Martin case (10/7/2012 10:20:36 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Raiikun
quote:
ORIGINAL: Rule
Umm, Farglebargle's demand predominantly specifies the 'unprovoked' condition. He does not dispute that Martin attacked Zimmerman.
Which is why #2 exists. If the State wants to claim Trayvon was legally provoked (that George is the aggressor), it's the State's job to prove it. If the State cannot show that Trayvon's breaking of George's nose was provoked by a contemporaneous use or threat of force (reaching for a cell phone to call police, or asking what Trayvon is doing doesn't cut it), then for the purposes of the legal proceeding and judging George's guilt, Trayvon is the aggressor.
Let see...there is no medical or any evidence what so ever blood, DNA, skin, hair etc. witness etc that Martin even touched Zimmerman. Martin medical exaim shows only a small scratch on his left ring finger, no swelling, brusies nothing on the hands, Zimmerman blood in not found on Martin on the hands. There is no evidence, medical or otherwise, that proves that Martin said what Zimmerman claims, nothing, no witness that state Martin was bang Zimmerman head on the ground or even punched him. No reports of how Zimmerman got his wounds, nothing about being hit in the nose or being slamed on the the sidewalk...nothing. Martin has no criminal history of violence, gang membership, robbery. As to Zimmerman an habitual lair, has an arrest record, including assaulting a police officer, has a restaining order against him by his ex girl friend, called co-worker names due to their ethnic back ground, tries to intimidate co-workers to give him their money, when confronted with his behavior he lies and manipuates and this is just for starters. You are right NO EVIDENCE [sm=brush.gif], but maybe Zimmerman membership in the NRA cancels all this out? And maybe your fairy tales.[sm=sad.gif]
|
|
|
|
