'supported' by 'investigators'?

what does that even mean,,lol

what constitutes support? what are these investigators names? Where can I find the source of this VERIFIED , SUPPORTED , set of facts according to 'investigators?

I dont believe that is true unless it can be proven there was an ATTACK actually initiated by Treyvon. If Treyvon were shot in the act of defending HIMSELF with his fists from an attack by someone carrying a gun, there is much more than a civil case.

what source do you get your info from? media?

dont we all get it from 'media'

the question is which media is credible,

INCLUDING police statements , if there is not the documentation to back it up anywhere,,,,

9 times out of 10

I totally agree. Men who made guns were men that had no other way to protect themself and figured life was expendable.

what kills me is the character assassination of a DEAD BOY though.

,,because he wore a hoodie?
..because he had marijuana residue at school?
..because crimes happened during a time span that he was sometimes in the neighborhood?


the reaching being done to justify this is sickening to me,,,,and makes me feel even worse for that childs parents,,,


my heart goes out,,,

I dont think he had an intent to kill, I think the killing was negligence because he HAPPENED to have a gun and couldnt fight once things got started. He probably was hoping this boy would just submit to whatever he was planning to do to keep him from 'getting away'.

He probably never CONCEIVED this boy would at any point be able to get the better of him.

yes, illegal touch will be the hard thing to prove

until or unless circumstantial evidence of lies on Zimmermans part
and a past of 'illegal touch' in Zimmermans past

tie together circumstantially to hold him accountable

stay tuned, you may be unpleasantly surprised,,,,

a punch didnt have to be first, when someone has a gun, or has followed you somewhere, just grabbing or pushing you can initiate a reason for a defensive fight,,,,

LOL.. wow,,,ok


so, they dont have ways to EDIT tapes now,,,? funny, they did it on other calls (zimmermans )

now who is speculating?

Trayvon was VISITING the neighborhood, he hadnt come to stay there,,,


split parents often share custody,,,


up to this point there is no evidence and no RECRORD of Treyvon being a t hief,,,

but again, turnabout is fair play, I knew that when they started revealing the 'squeaky clean' record of Zimmerman (all having to do with physical ocntact, btw)

the DIG would begin for any POTENTIAL connection Trayvon might have to anything illegal,,,,


still doesnt stop that he had the right to be there,
had the right to feel intimidated and uncooperative with a stranger who had been following him, every right not to feel an obligation to answer the stranger who had pursued him,

and every right to fight for his life under those initimidating circumstances if the man did so much as Grab him,,,,,let alone happen to expose that he was carrying a WEAPON

all of that is more likely and reasonable than thinking this young man came BACK after trying to loose his stalker and hauled off in a physical confrontation

NOTHING so far in Treyvons past indicates that as his character, several things in Zimmermans past indicate that confrontation and PUSHING are in his character though,,,

he IS guilty,, he had a weapon, the child didnt, the child is dead

he is GUILTY of killing someones kid

whether it was 'justified' would be hard to prove to me because of the knowledge that he first 'pursued' the kid,,,


whether it was malicious, reckless, or any other group of conditions the system allows is what they need to show

if there is inconsistency or 'lies', like how he said he was squeaky clean although he has four seperate charges in his past,,,,,

in his version of what happened, would be further evidence of deception,, something that would not be needed if he were truly 'innocent'


his version MAKES NO SENSE, as judge judy would say,,,,

I have seen no evidence, nor have you, to make that claim.

and the CLAIMS and REPORTS dont even have evidence he was 'jumped'

its just evidence that he fought and wasnt WINNING the fight

I honestly dont think it was hate as much as it was unfounded fear.

I feel sorry for Zimmerman because I think he let his 'role' get
away from him and made HIM feel like the hunted instead of the hunter, when someone ended up fighting for their life instead of cowering to his approach and possible physical contact,


which panicked him and caused him to reach for the simple and fast solution of a gun and a bullet,,,,

it would be so much simpler for people to see if he had just walked up and shot him

but unfortunately, a fight ensued, and that fight with a teenager gave him justification to take the teenagers life in many peoples minds,,,,

Im not mad because of racism, Im mad that a grown man took a young mans life with a gun after tha man PURSUED the boy (not vice versa)

and everyone just wants to believe the boy must have been a punk who jumped him

I agree. The possession of a gun by a wanna be cop, real life coward, is responsible for that boy dying.

I didnt jump on any wagon. I saw a young man unarmed shot by a grown man with a gun. I heard the tapes of this grown man assuming the boy was up to 'no good', an 'ahole' and possibly 'getting away'

I heard a dispatcher tell this man not to pursue the boy and to ask the man (neighborhood watch for how long now?) where he was at to wh ich he replied that the police should check with him when they arrived to 'see' where he was at,,,

all this implies to me a strange man with a gun pursued a young man with an unfounded belief in that young mans criminality and a desperate desire to make sure he didnt get away


all of that makes me think of a young man, on that night, walking in the dark and noticing some strange man following him

trying to 'lose him' by retreating between some buildings only to be confronted again by this same persistent man (with a past of pushing people )

who most likely doesnt identify himself in any way (he didnt bother to identify his watch status on the dispatcher tape) and just feels ENTITLED to question this young man based upon the previously mentioned assumptions

so what does this boy do now? he has tried to lose this man, he has run somewhere there would be no reason for the man to follow him to,, and YET,, there the man is

asking 'what are you doing here' and possessing a gun,,,

(possibly pushing or grabbing him to furhter assert authority?) and so the boy fights for his life

when would the boy have an opportunity to do anything else once it is clear there is a gun? he cant outrun a gun or a bullet? and in the mind of the man who pursued him there is then a fear that his own weapon will end up in the boys hand and be used against him. So even if the boy grabs for the gun so that he can finally retreat,,,,the man can again claim self defense because the boy grabbed for the gun that very MAN introduced into the situation that night





where was HIS right to defend h imself against a very REASONABLE fear initiated by being stalked and approached by someone carrying a gun?

he didnt have that right, it was trumped by the mans right to further damage this boy by not just intimidating him but finally killing him?

no, mr zimmermans reckless actions set in motion what happend that night and he should be accountable,,,,

there you go,, if it happened NEAR his SUV, but the witnesses calling said it was happening in the back of the building,,,,,one even saying it was near her PORCH,,,,

the location depends upon the geography , zimmerman claimed on the tape that he ran between some buildings

the girlfriend says Treyvon said he had 'lost' zimmerman which would make sense if he ran between some buildings

but then , according to the girlfriend, Zimmerman was once again BEHIND Trayvon


so if the areas between the buildings are within that fifty to one hundred feet, there are still too many possibilities and questions to answer

and of course, on the way 'back' to Zimmermans suv after admitting to following the boy could be any distance depending upon how far he traveled to pursue him,,,,

a trial to clear his appearance of guilt


if the boy should have just been open to answering zimmermans questions, ,zimmerman should have no problem being open to answering the family's.....



fair play,,,except zimmerman will walk away from the questions alive,,,