To: sten
it’s been confirmed in a court of law that te little thug attacked and tried to kill the local security officer Actually, it has not.
All that has been established is that the state was unable to prove Zimmerman's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
To: Sherman Logan
My personal feelings aside, you are correct.
Facts are facts.
7 posted on
07/14/2013 5:09:36 PM PDT by
autumnraine
(America how long will you be so deaf and dumb to thoe tumbril wheels carrying you to the guillotine?)
To: Sherman Logan
..and there is no such thing as a sunrise Sherman, the sun is stationary and the earth turns to bring it into view [/s]
9 posted on
07/14/2013 5:14:42 PM PDT by
KTM rider
( Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb)
To: Sherman Logan
10 posted on
07/14/2013 5:15:48 PM PDT by
stormer
To: Sherman Logan
incorrect
as evidence showed, Zimmerman had lost the thug and was on his way back to his truck, as evidenced by the 9-11 call. the thug had escaped. the only way for the confrontation to occur from that point would be for the thug to double back and attack
13 posted on
07/14/2013 5:24:11 PM PDT by
sten
(fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
To: Sherman Logan
21 posted on
07/14/2013 6:20:18 PM PDT by
JoeProBono
(Mille vocibus imago valet;-{)
To: Sherman Logan
Martin wasn’t on trial, since he was supposedly the victim, but it was certainly proved that he wasn’t out for a stroll in the rain and that Zimmerman wasn’t watching him because he was black but because of his behavior, and that he attacked Zimmerman and not the reverse.
24 posted on
07/14/2013 6:23:31 PM PDT by
livius
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
