“Convenient that you left out that I also said Martin was a macho teen and that both were dopes and punks...convenient but predictable.”
Not a matter of convenience, really. Though you stipulated both are dopes/punks/machos and Zimmerman shouldn’t be on trial, you’ve made clear you believe Zimmerman started the fight and murdered Martin. Therefore, your assessment of Zimmerman’s character, based on nothing so much as what you assume happened within the evidence gap, is relevant. Your assessment of Martin’s character less so, since his machismo didn’t, in your opinion, contribute to the crime committed against him.
___________________________
Nonsense. I offer alternate, plausible scenarios.
+++++++++++++
" Therefore, your assessment of Zimmerman’s character, based on nothing so much as what you assume happened within the evidence gap, is relevant."
________________________________
My assessment of Zimmerman is not at all based on the gap. It is based on his arrest history and the actions that we know he took before the fight.
++++++++++
Your assessment of Martin’s character less so, since his machismo didn’t, in your opinion, contribute to the crime committed against him.
________________________
Oh, you think a crime was committed against Martin?
How about you stop trying to tell me what I think and stick to my actual words.
I do think that Zimmerman was ill-prepared for the situation that was created when he got out of the car and started to follow Martin.