Zimmerman again!

So, Zimmerman can't stay out of the news and boy does he love guns. His wife called 911 on him a couple of days ago for threatening behavior.
That's to say he was waving a gun around and allegedly he hit his father-in-law.
Now, here is this guy recently released on a murder charge, get's pulled over on two occasions for speeding and is brought to the police station for questioning.
No charges have been filed. The same police spokesman gave two different accounts one contradicting the other on what the next phase was.

Really?

Turns out there was no gun and Zimmerman was released.


What we have here was probably a set up.

His wife left him before the Trayvon Martin incident and recently filed for Divorce.
It was probably explained to her that because she left before that she would have no claim to any income that Zimmerman would make after that. No piece of the Book and TV deal.

So the move was to create a confrontation and call the police to be able to make a claim later.

Anthony, how long will you defend this out of control ass? He punched/pushed the father in law. He is shown destroying his wife's iPAD, he made threats to the father and in the course of a four week period in addition to the speeding tickets for 'excessive speed' he gets one of them (tickets) as he was looking to get a new gun.
In my work he would be classified as having either one of two conditions as displayed by he behavior. One would Narcissistic Personality Disorder or Histrionic Personality Disorder. Each would manifest itself in a more dramatic sense with the removal of the catalyst that prompted the spotlight to be shown and keeping him in the news as some type of hero/victim.

More violence shown. Instead of defending this guy , Anthony, take a logical look at him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Turns out there was no gun and Zimmerman was released.


What we have here was probably a set up.

His wife left him before the Trayvon Martin incident and recently filed for Divorce.
It was probably explained to her that because she left before that she would have no claim to any income that Zimmerman would make after that. No piece of the Book and TV deal.

So the move was to create a confrontation and call the police to be able to make a claim later.

---

That's a possibility but not the only one. Just as there were no all good or all bad players in the original TM incident, its doubtful that there are any here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Anthony, how long will you defend this out of control ass? He punched/pushed the father in law. He is shown destroying his wife's iPAD, he made threats to the father and in the course of a four week period in addition to the speeding tickets for 'excessive speed' he gets one of them (tickets) as he was looking to get a new gun.
In my work he would be classified as having either one of two conditions as displayed by he behavior. One would Narcissistic Personality Disorder or Histrionic Personality Disorder. Each would manifest itself in a more dramatic sense with the removal of the catalyst that prompted the spotlight to be shown and keeping him in the news as some type of hero/victim.

More violence shown. Instead of defending this guy , Anthony, take a logical look at him.

---

The man was found innocent and rightly so.

Him getting a speeding ticket is something that happens to 100's of thousands of people in the USA every week.

Buying a gun is a right and frankly considering all of the death threats against him the smart move.

The alleged attack on his father in law is pure he said/she said. The police always tend to side on the side of the female on these cases and the fact they let Mr. Zimmerman go speaks volumes.

BTW In the USA you are innocent until proven guilty. Even with your School yard Psych evaluation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Turns out there was no gun and Zimmerman was released.


What we have here was probably a set up.

His wife left him before the Trayvon Martin incident and recently filed for Divorce.
It was probably explained to her that because she left before that she would have no claim to any income that Zimmerman would make after that. No piece of the Book and TV deal.

So the move was to create a confrontation and call the police to be able to make a claim later.

---

That's a possibility but not the only one. Just as there were no all good or all bad players in the original TM incident, its doubtful that there are any here.

---

In all sincerity I thank you for the compliment of my "school yard psych" evaluation". With all my efforts to stoop to that level you again, not just this time but ,oh so many others don't understand the simplicity with which I have tried to explain to you on the characteristic traits of people like Zimmerman.

I'm glad you decided to nitpick so much of my post and I imagine that you do not realize that your inadvertent remarks pertaining to a four week period actually bolsters what I have suggested not minimizing it.

Oh, the divorce was announced yesterday and the show of aggression by Zimmerman, smashing her 'phone to pieces that the police are now unable (as yet ) to put the film together. Fortunately, there already is film.

Hitting the father in law, yes it was recorded.

So go on and with your personal crusade as well as that of Starter in trying to make a victim out of a criminal.

You theorized and he (Starter) agreed to some type of conspiracy. That is so funny it does not deserve a response. All it does is make me more reluctant to actually say what I really believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Turns out there was no gun and Zimmerman was released.


What we have here was probably a set up.

His wife left him before the Trayvon Martin incident and recently filed for Divorce.
It was probably explained to her that because she left before that she would have no claim to any income that Zimmerman would make after that. No piece of the Book and TV deal.

So the move was to create a confrontation and call the police to be able to make a claim later.

---

That's a possibility but not the only one. Just as there were no all good or all bad players in the original TM incident, its doubtful that there are any here.

---

In all sincerity I thank you for the compliment of my "school yard psych" evaluation". With all my efforts to stoop to that level you again, not just this time but ,oh so many others don't understand the simplicity with which I have tried to explain to you on the characteristic traits of people like Zimmerman.

I'm glad you decided to nitpick so much of my post and I imagine that you do not realize that your inadvertent remarks pertaining to a four week period actually bolsters what I have suggested not minimizing it.

Oh, the divorce was announced yesterday and the show of aggression by Zimmerman, smashing her 'phone to pieces that the police are now unable (as yet ) to put the film together. Fortunately, there already is film.

Hitting the father in law, yes it was recorded.

So go on and with your personal crusade as well as that of Starter in trying to make a victim out of a criminal.

You theorized and he (Starter) agreed to some type of conspiracy. That is so funny it does not deserve a response. All it does is make me more reluctant to actually say what I really believe.

---

You are more than welcome to post a link to the recording of George Zimmerman striking his Father-In-Law.
Go right ahead. Lets see it.

Oh wait. That video doesn't exist. Just like the gun his estranged wife said he threatened them with.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...-soon/2800397/

Now what is more important is that your OK.

With all that knee-jerking and bad landings from all the jumping to conclusions I fear that you are going to hurt yourself.

Not so quick there Vop... this guy has SPEEDING TICKETS!

I'll prepare a noose. Someone look for the appropriate tree :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Not so quick there Vop... this guy has SPEEDING TICKETS!

I'll prepare a noose. Someone look for the appropriate tree :)

---

Holy Crap!

He was written up for 1 speeding Ticket. B.F.D.!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Not so quick there Vop... this guy has SPEEDING TICKETS!

I'll prepare a noose. Someone look for the appropriate tree :)

---

Sorry but I have to leave this board now. I'm going underground, so the authorities and lynch mobs can't find me. I've had a couple of speeding tickets, the last being about 14 years ago (thank goodness for V1s), and the shame will haunt me for the rest of my life.

This is obviously not an amicable separation. These kinds of things go on all the time in divorces. It is standard strategy (at least in the USA) for the plaintiff to file a restraining order against her/his spouse with absolutely no evidence that said spouse is a high risk of being physically abusive, and it is also standard procedure for the defendant to respond by filing a restraining order against the plaintiff. I have a suspicion, and it is only a guess, that chubby's wife has an over-aggressive lawyer, or she has just taken some bad advice. This really looks like a non starter.
BTW I'm still glad that chubby got the living sh1t kicked out of him by Martin. :angel:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Alca-Tazizzle

This is obviously not an amicable separation. These kinds of things go on all the time in divorces. It is standard strategy (at least in the USA) for the plaintiff to file a restraining order against her/his spouse with absolutely no evidence that said spouse is a high risk of being physically abusive, and it is also standard procedure for the defendant to respond by filing a restraining order against the plaintiff. I have a suspicion, and it is only a guess, that chubby's wife has an over-aggressive lawyer, or she has just taken some bad advice. This really looks like a non starter.
BTW I'm still glad that chubby got the living sh1t kicked out of him by Martin. :angel:

---

Not in the USA only, we get it here too! Though it must be said, no one else in the world can match a US lawyer and their plaintiff for the utter tripe they will try and sue for in any situation!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Not so quick there Vop... this guy has SPEEDING TICKETS!

I'll prepare a noose. Someone look for the appropriate tree :)

---

Holy Crap!

He was written up for 1 speeding Ticket. B.F.D.!!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Not so quick there Vop... this guy has SPEEDING TICKETS!

I'll prepare a noose. Someone look for the appropriate tree :)

---

Sorry but I have to leave this board now. I'm going underground, so the authorities and lynch mobs can't find me. I've had a couple of speeding tickets, the last being about 14 years ago (thank goodness for V1s), and the shame will haunt me for the rest of my life.

---

It's too late Starter, the black helicopters will provide your location. And I've found a sturdy tree, and have plenty of rope. You right wing speeders can't be tolerated! :angryfire



I certainly hope that neither of you took me seriously. I was simply making light of the fact that based on nothing more than a speeding ticket the OP has once again condemned someone. As with previous threads, blatantly false information, lack of seeking the full story, a great deal of obvious bias, and a failed attempt at playing psychologist on the internet have led to a conclusion of guilt.


We should now prepare for the accusations of bias, prejudice, political slant, lack of intellect, and general accusations that follow any time forum members look at facts rather than fiction. :D


My last speeding ticket was issued about 12 years ago, but I had a young child in the car. Having lived in shame since, I have prepared a firing squad that will shoot me at the split second the noose pulls tight around my neck. I'm not being hard on Vop or Starter, and even in my shame I believe in fairness. Hang 'em high! :laugh:

With all the reeking sarcasm spewing forth from a few of the posters who would defend Zimmerman in any situation, the police chief in the area that Zimmerman lives stated that he would revoke his gun privileges himself if he could.
Those that sneer at two speeding tickets and the events of this week are missing the point. It was stated by said police chief that there is a pattern emerging (where did I see that before) and that Zimmerman needed to be watched.
So off you guys go with your sarcastic and blatantly ....... comments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

With all the reeking sarcasm spewing forth from a few of the posters who would defend Zimmerman in any situation, the police chief in the area that Zimmerman lives stated that he would revoke his gun privileges himself if he could.
Those that sneer at two speeding tickets and the events of this week are missing the point. It was stated by said police chief that there is a pattern emerging (where did I see that before) and that Zimmerman needed to be watched.
So off you guys go with your sarcastic and blatantly ....... comments.

---

I could care less what you say a cop thinks.

Facts are facts.

The only law the George Zimmerman has broken is a traffic violation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

With all the reeking sarcasm spewing forth from a few of the posters who would defend Zimmerman in any situation, the police chief in the area that Zimmerman lives stated that he would revoke his gun privileges himself if he could.
Those that sneer at two speeding tickets and the events of this week are missing the point. It was stated by said police chief that there is a pattern emerging (where did I see that before) and that Zimmerman needed to be watched.
So off you guys go with your sarcastic and blatantly ....... comments.

---

I could care less what you say a cop thinks.

Facts are facts.

The only law the George Zimmerman has broken is a traffic violation.

---

How do you know that? You can only work from 'facts' that have been published on the internet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

I could care less what you say a cop thinks.

---

The phrase should be 'couldn't care less'. When you think about it, the version you use doesn't make a huge amount of sense. But I digress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

I could care less what you say a cop thinks.

---

The phrase should be 'couldn't care less'. When you think about it, the version you use doesn't make a huge amount of sense. But I digress.

---

Sorry I have to add my two cents:
It's retarded, and grates my nerves,(or at best is meaningles) to say "I could care less,which represents the opposite of "I couldn't care less", which is a figure of speach that makes sense! :dork: :idea:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Not so quick there Vop... this guy has SPEEDING TICKETS!

I'll prepare a noose. Someone look for the appropriate tree :)

---

Bad taste but very telling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D-Type

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

With all the reeking sarcasm spewing forth from a few of the posters who would defend Zimmerman in any situation, the police chief in the area that Zimmerman lives stated that he would revoke his gun privileges himself if he could.
Those that sneer at two speeding tickets and the events of this week are missing the point. It was stated by said police chief that there is a pattern emerging (where did I see that before) and that Zimmerman needed to be watched.
So off you guys go with your sarcastic and blatantly ....... comments.

---

I could care less what you say a cop thinks.

Facts are facts.

The only law the George Zimmerman has broken is a traffic violation.

---

How do you know that? You can only work from 'facts' that have been published on the internet.

---

Is there something wrong with facts and interviews that are from the internet? I find the internet very accurate when you know where the legitimate information can be discovered. But, as it turns out I read it from an article and a report on Nightly News.
It is amusing to me that one should infer that the internet is not valid at the same time you post almost 2,000 times on this board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Turns out there was no gun and Zimmerman was released.


What we have here was probably a set up.

His wife left him before the Trayvon Martin incident and recently filed for Divorce.
It was probably explained to her that because she left before that she would have no claim to any income that Zimmerman would make after that. No piece of the Book and TV deal.

So the move was to create a confrontation and call the police to be able to make a claim later.

---

Who was setting up Zimmerman? Is your passionate affair with this clown based upon the fact that he shot and killed an unarmed 17 year boy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

Turns out there was no gun and Zimmerman was released.


What we have here was probably a set up.

His wife left him before the Trayvon Martin incident and recently filed for Divorce.
It was probably explained to her that because she left before that she would have no claim to any income that Zimmerman would make after that. No piece of the Book and TV deal.

So the move was to create a confrontation and call the police to be able to make a claim later.

---

That's a possibility but not the only one. Just as there were no all good or all bad players in the original TM incident, its doubtful that there are any here.

---

Everything and anything is possible. Now you believe the garbage being vomited in projectile fashion by Vop and with the Airshifter ironically talking about black helicopters.
What would you or any of the Zimmerman supporters say if the case was reversed and Trayvon did the shooting?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Not so quick there Vop... this guy has SPEEDING TICKETS!

I'll prepare a noose. Someone look for the appropriate tree :)

---

Bad taste but very telling.

---

What I find much more telling is this....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

That's to say he was waving a gun around and allegedly he hit his father-in-law.

---

We now know that there was no waving of a gun, yet you continue to try to condemn this guy proven only to be a speeder. I think it's telling what levels you will stoop to in an attempt to vilify someone who has already been cleared through due process of law, and even more telling that you attack those who support the law.

I'll openly admit I can't decide which is more comical... the general nonsensical rants, or the attempts at making people think you have some type of psychology background. But please continue as we currently have no good joke threads active on the forum! :laugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by D-Type

How do you know that? You can only work from 'facts' that have been published on the internet.

---

It is amusing to me that one should infer that the internet is not valid at the same time you post almost 2,000 times on this board.

---

I think D-Type's post was directed at Vop, not you ;) :dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

I think it's telling what levels you will stoop to in an attempt to vilify someone who has already been cleared through due process of law, and even more telling that you attack those who support the law.

---

Better to question the law's judgement than support it blindly. There are plenty of occasions when the law gets it wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Not so quick there Vop... this guy has SPEEDING TICKETS!

I'll prepare a noose. Someone look for the appropriate tree :)

---

Bad taste but very telling.

---

What I find much more telling is this....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

That's to say he was waving a gun around and allegedly he hit his father-in-law.

---

We now know that there was no waving of a gun, yet you continue to try to condemn this guy proven only to be a speeder. I think it's telling what levels you will stoop to in an attempt to vilify someone who has already been cleared through due process of law, and even more telling that you attack those who support the law.

I'll openly admit I can't decide which is more comical... the general nonsensical rants, or the attempts at making people think you have some type of psychology background. But please continue as we currently have no good joke threads active on the forum! :laugh:

---

Think what you wish about my background. No attempt was made by me to have someone presume such. What is really evident here Shifter is that you and your ilk will defend this idiot no matter what.
I now know from your angry little screed that you believe OJ Simpson is innocent because he was acquitted or found not guilty
for the murders in '94.

[quote=donKey jote]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by "D-Type":1gfs2jh8

How do you know that? You can only work from 'facts' that have been published on the internet.

---

It is amusing to me that one should infer that the internet is not valid at the same time you post almost 2,000 times on this board.

---

I think D-Type's post was directed at Vop, not you ;) :dozey:[/quote:1gfs2jh8]
If that is the case I apologize.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Think what you wish about my background. No attempt was made by me to have someone presume such.

---

If you don't want anyone to think you might have some type of qualified background, then why would you post something such as this.....??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

In my work he would be classified as having either one of two conditions as displayed by he behavior. One would Narcissistic Personality Disorder or Histrionic Personality Disorder.

---

Was this to simply imply that "your work" involved application of stereotypes to people you dislike?

If you are applying a classification of a mental disorder, there are two ways to go about such thing. With a qualified opinion that might be given by a medical professional with the proper background, or as a complete guess of someone playing qualified on the internet. The former certainly wouldn't diagnose someone based on press reports when such a diagnosis would be much better accomplished and more accurate based on in person assessements. The person attempting to appear qualified apparently doesn't need any such contact, and can pick and choose what they wish to apply a diagnosis or a specific disorder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

What is really evident here Shifter is that you and your ilk will defend this idiot no matter what.
I now know from your angry little screed that you believe OJ Simpson is innocent because he was acquitted or found not guilty
for the murders in '94.

---

I don't need to defend Zimmerman, the process of law in this country did that without any help from any of us on the forum. As for OJ, the law did the same in one trial due primarily to bungling cops and forensics. But the civil suit ruled against him found him liable for damages. He has since been convicted of numerous other felonies.

You seem to get yourself in trouble when you assume something that you state as fact. Being I haven't made any statements concerning OJ or his trials until now, you're once again playing internet psychologist thinking that you know what I am thinking better than I do. Good luck with that. :laugh: If you could actually be minful of facts rather than act based on your biases and prejudices, you might accept that what you are doing is not fact based. What I am doing is based on facts. If I were to start a thread about the murderous thug OJ Simpson is, and come up with false statements without citing any credible sources, then we might be doing similar things. But that hasn't happened has it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Think what you wish about my background. No attempt was made by me to have someone presume such.

---

If you don't want anyone to think you might have some type of qualified background, then why would you post something such as this.....??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

In my work he would be classified as having either one of two conditions as displayed by he behavior. One would Narcissistic Personality Disorder or Histrionic Personality Disorder.

---

Was this to simply imply that "your work" involved application of stereotypes to people you dislike?

If you are applying a classification of a mental disorder, there are two ways to go about such thing. With a qualified opinion that might be given by a medical professional with the proper background, or as a complete guess of someone playing qualified on the internet. The former certainly wouldn't diagnose someone based on press reports when such a diagnosis would be much better accomplished and more accurate based on in person assessements. The person attempting to appear qualified apparently doesn't need any such contact, and can pick and choose what they wish to apply a diagnosis or a specific disorder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

What is really evident here Shifter is that you and your ilk will defend this idiot no matter what.
I now know from your angry little screed that you believe OJ Simpson is innocent because he was acquitted or found not guilty
for the murders in '94.

---

I don't need to defend Zimmerman, the process of law in this country did that without any help from any of us on the forum. As for OJ, the law did the same in one trial due primarily to bungling cops and forensics. But the civil suit ruled against him found him liable for damages. He has since been convicted of numerous other felonies.

You seem to get yourself in trouble when you assume something that you state as fact. Being I haven't made any statements concerning OJ or his trials until now, you're once again playing internet psychologist thinking that you know what I am thinking better than I do. Good luck with that. :laugh: If you could actually be minful of facts rather than act based on your biases and prejudices, you might accept that what you are doing is not fact based. What I am doing is based on facts. If I were to start a thread about the murderous thug OJ Simpson is, and come up with false statements without citing any credible sources, then we might be doing similar things. But that hasn't happened has it?

---

Airshifter, can't you just put your narcissistic ego aside for a short time. When you do that you will more than likely find that it is YOU that is doing most of the surmising. I am not playing internet psychologist but thank you all the name. What are you playing, "the contradiction"? I say that because most of what you trumpet has this annoying self righteous feel to it. You pick and choose who want to demonize based on your political bent. That is an observation that would hold true in the offices' of most psychologists who might wander into these forums.
Airshifter, look at what you wrote in response to my statement regarding OJ Simpson. You did exactly what I stated and once again you try to tangle the issue in knots. Simpson was never found guilty of murder. That is a fact. Civil court cannot pace a guilty charge such as that of a criminal nature upon a person in it's court. But, you are doing exactly that. I predicted it and you came up trumps.

As you want me to be a psychologist of the internet sort I will have to state that I would be lying. However, there are many many fields where the clinical understanding through observation does not require the direct and personal study of a subject.
So, when you try to insult me , forget it. I do not feel insulted at all. Stick to WHAT YOU know and not try to ascertain what I do for a living. Golly, when I look at my grammatical mistakes and mistyped words I embarrass myself.

You still seem unable to grasp the truth. If you feel I have surmised anything, QUOTE IT. I can quote numerous times you have made false statements, first regarding Zimmerman, and later regarding me. The same goes for the above about OJ... I never said he was found guilty of murder, but you want to debate it as if you are correct and I'm not. Where am I incorrect in what I said?

As for your once again making assessments of me, if you find it self righteous that I prefer to deal with facts... seems to me that is your issue and not mine. It has nothing to do with ego, it has to do with identification of fact vs fiction. With the modern press, much of what is reported is speculation at best, and often downright lies. Drilled down to facts the story is often quite different IMO.

Go ahead and quote. My grasp of the truth is impugned by what? Tell me.

You assume that the press is wrong in it's reporting. How do you know? What papers are you reading. Keep your assumptions as ;IMO.

I am not always correct but I will apologize when I err. Do you. Of course not, your comments are always on point. Sarcasm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Go ahead and quote. My grasp of the truth is impugned by what? Tell me.

You assume that the press is wrong in it's reporting. How do you know? What papers are you reading. Keep your assumptions as ;IMO.

I am not always correct but I will apologize when I err. Do you. Of course not, your comments are always on point. Sarcasm.

---

So SpaFranco - based on the following facts: I have one yes or no question for you. Don't write a book - just yes or no:

Evidence proved trayvon was beating Zimmerman's head and bashing it on the concrete.

Your question:

Do you think people should be allowed to bash anothers head on the concrete?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roamy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spafranco

Go ahead and quote. My grasp of the truth is impugned by what? Tell me.

You assume that the press is wrong in it's reporting. How do you know? What papers are you reading. Keep your assumptions as ;IMO.

I am not always correct but I will apologize when I err. Do you. Of course not, your comments are always on point. Sarcasm.

---

So SpaFranco - based on the following facts: I have one yes or no question for you. Don't write a book - just yes or no:

Evidence proved trayvon was beating Zimmerman's head and bashing it on the concrete.

Your question:

Do you think people should be allowed to bash anothers head on the concrete?

---

Roamy, my suggestion to you is, don't write a book.

So SpaFranco - based on the following facts: :burn: I have one yes or no question for you. Don't write a book - just yes or no:
Why would I write a book? What kind of idiotic demand is that? Do you want to write a book? If so go ahead. I will make sure that Barnes and Noble put it in the comedy center as your tickling commentary regarding Trayvon bashing Zimmermans head into the pavement. Where was the evidence for this? Do you have any idea what bashing one's head into a pavement would produce? Certainly not a trickle of blood as shown in the photo's released.You have used the word bashing more than once. What have you used the lower case T for Trayvon? Mistake or deliberate.

The bashing you have perceived on your own I might add would have led to concussion at least and sever bleeding. Capillaries and small arteries are very slightly protected on the head from above the eyes all the way back of the skull, thus incling the right and left side including the temples and above the ears. This bashing did not lead to any hospitalization. Not refused. Not needed. Twist all of this as you want. Zimmerman got lucky. For how long? Who knows. Below is medical evidence from the trial;

On Tuesday, a medical examiner called by prosecutors testified that Mr. Zimmerman's injuries not only were not life-threatening, but also were "very insignificant." Her assessment addresses a key aspect of the trial, in which Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain of his gated community in Sanford, Fla., faces second-degree murder charges in the shooting death of the unarmed teen on Feb. 26, 2012.

Dr. Valerie Rao, the medical examiner for Duval, Clay, and Nassau Counties in northern Florida, said Zimmerman’s injuries could have been the result of a single blow during a confrontation between the two. [Editor's note: The original version of this paragraph misspelled Dr. Rao's first name.] Bashing?

Once more, Zimmerman arrested and in jail.

Lol, people still care about this? America needs to collectively get a life.

I thought there were some newsworthy stories going around... Obamacare going to shit, the EU whinge over German trade surplus, Australia's relationship with Indonesia going down the toilet, etc. But apparently some guy who shot another guy is all we got.

I'm sure the dead kids family are chuffed to bits to see this guy going to jail for something other than murdering their son. This guy comes across as a career trouble maker and I wouldn't give him news space any more. Thankfully he doesn't show up in our news and its only threads like this that really bring it to our attention. Zim Zim ahhh.

I guessing the guy is a proper Assclown, and the sickest part of this story is that the woman he allegedly assaulted is carrying his devil-spawn. Did I mention that I'm glad he got the living shit kicked out of him by Trevon Martin?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Alca-Tazizzle

I guessing the guy is a proper Assclown, and the sickest part of this story is that the woman he allegedly assaulted is carrying his devil-spawn. Did I mention that I'm glad he got the living shit kicked out of him by Trevon Martin?

---

I feel really sorry for the parents of this young man Trayvon, he should be alive today. The person he supposedly attacked has now been in the news how many times?
This internet psychologist states that the real reason this is such a right wing love story for Zimmerman is for one reason. Guns. Take out the gun, replace it with a knife and not a peep from Fox or their mouthpieces. Zimmerman is found guilty and in prison instead of pointing a gun at a pregnant women.