New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Trayvon Martin hoax is about to be exposed!!

Mick

The Right is always right
You're probably thinking of the 12 year old playing alone in a park with a toy gun.....who was shot and killed by cops in Cleveland. He was Tamir Rice.
You mean the 150 lb kid who ripped off the orange tag on a pellet gun and aimed it at police officers who were suppose to wait and see if they were shot dead before responding? You need another vacation from this place. Any way we can facilitate that?

Lulz
 

Mick

The Right is always right
I guess , but we already know all that. They showed old and innocent pictures, they downplayed the assault on Zimmerman, even covering up the footage of his head injury, and downplayed witness testimony that exonerated Zimmerman. We knew all this by the time the trial ended.
I’m disputing there’s anything new here as some great reveal. Seems someone’s hyping it but there doesn’t seem to be any real news.
Yes, WE, all know that. Anyone with at least average IQ knows that. The left has been unable to come to grips with it, however, and many still pass their racist conspiracies along. Look at EatThePoor on this thread as one example.
 

EatTheRich

President
One of those may even be true.
Following is not stalking, it's trying to keep someone within eyeshot, it's well short of a confrontation or assault.
He didn't attempt to run away and hide. There would have been no confrontation in that case.
According to Zimmerman himself, he did attempt to run away, and then to hide, at which point Zimmerman searched for him. In other words, there was a confrontation because Zimmerman made sure there would be one.

If Martin initiated the confrontation, I frankly don't care what caused him to strike the other man first.
But he didn’t. He was menaced by an intoxicated individual and attempted to avoid confrontation but had one forced on him. When the individual menacing him became openly hostile and reached into his jacket, a reasonable person would have feared an imminent deadly attack, giving Martin the right under Florida’s self-defense statute to employ force in defense against such an attack.
Jenteal only speculated that Zimmerman "initiated the confrontation" which was actually physically impossible since he lost sight of Trayvon until he was confronted by him.
According to her testimony, Zimmerman found Martin, who fled again, chased him down, and was confronted only when he caught up Martin asked why he was being followed.

Her testimony was impeached, even according to liberal pundits.

https://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2013/06/she-said-she-called-trayvon-back-and-he-answered-she-was-able-to-start-talking-to-him-on-the-phone-i.html

UPDATE-- Jeralyn Merritt, the liberal attorney who writes the "Talk Left" blog, has weighed in on today's "train wreck" testimony by Jeantel:

She is now impeached on several areas, especially GZ's response to TM after TM confronted GZ and asked him, "What are you following me for?" I'm so glad West brought this out, see my post here. Her first answer to Crump was that GZ responded with "What are you talking about" not "What are you doing around here." (Audio clip here.) Crump, immediately realizing that this was different than what she had told Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton, stopped her and told her she had said something different to the Martins, and asked her to start over. She began again, and told it the Crump and Martin way....

After reading the transcript, she finally admitted (today) she had changed her version at the urging of Crump, but said she had just been mixed up because she rushed through Crump's interview and didn't think carefully about what she was saying.



Perhaps Trayvon felt menaced. While true he then made a "fight or flight" decision, and in retrospect, it was the wrong one.
So a mentally challenged young woman got two similar phrases mixed up and misspoke on the stand, immediately correcting herself when the discrepancy between the statement she made when the incident was fresh in her mind and her garbled version of the same statement months later was pointed out to her. Big deal.
 

EatTheRich

President
We try to use facts here. Baseless racist left wing accusations that are inconsistent with the physical facts and testimony are no longer welcome. Move on.
He and his defenders literally said he was suspicious of Martin because he was Black and (other) Black guys had been committing burglaries.
 

EatTheRich

President
You mean the 150 lb kid who ripped off the orange tag on a pellet gun and aimed it at police officers who were suppose to wait and see if they were shot dead before responding? You need another vacation from this place. Any way we can facilitate that?

Lulz
The claim that he pointed the toy gun at them was refuted by the dash cam. They literally pulled up and opened fire within half a second.
 

Mick

The Right is always right
He and his defenders literally said he was suspicious of Martin because he was Black and (other) Black guys had been committing burglaries.
Like I said, no one is interested in your racist conspiracies. Move on.
 

Mick

The Right is always right
The claim that he pointed the toy gun at them was refuted by the dash cam. They literally pulled up and opened fire within half a second.
The gun was aimed at them before he was shot. Stop posting racist lies. They are not welcome.
 

Dino

Russian Asset
According to Zimmerman himself, he did attempt to run away, and then to hide, at which point Zimmerman searched for him. In other words, there was a confrontation because Zimmerman made sure there would be one.



But he didn’t. He was menaced by an intoxicated individual and attempted to avoid confrontation but had one forced on him. When the individual menacing him became openly hostile and reached into his jacket, a reasonable person would have feared an imminent deadly attack, giving Martin the right under Florida’s self-defense statute to employ force in defense against such an attack.


According to her testimony, Zimmerman found Martin, who fled again, chased him down, and was confronted only when he caught up Martin asked why he was being followed.



So a mentally challenged young woman got two similar phrases mixed up and misspoke on the stand, immediately correcting herself when the discrepancy between the statement she made when the incident was fresh in her mind and her garbled version of the same statement months later was pointed out to her. Big deal.
You switched from telling a truth and surrpunding it with lies to telling nothing but lies.

I wish the details and trial YOU claim happened actually happened, it would have made the verdict harder to predict.

You got caught in yet another lie here, which to me if you actually could win the argument by telling the truth you'd certainly try....

ABC News has learned police seemed to accept Zimmerman's account at face value that night and that he was not tested for drugs or alcohol on the night of the shooting, even though it is standard procedure in most homicide investigations.
 

EatTheRich

President
You switched from telling a truth and surrpunding it with lies to telling nothing but lies.

I wish the details and trial YOU claim happened actually happened, it would have made the verdict harder to predict.

You got caught in yet another lie here, which to me if you actually could win the argument by telling the truth you'd certainly try....

ABC News has learned police seemed to accept Zimmerman's account at face value that night and that he was not tested for drugs or alcohol on the night of the shooting, even though it is standard procedure in most homicide investigations.
What was the lie? Does the fact that he wasn’t tested for drugs and that the police sabotaged any effort to secure a conviction by ignoring procedure and giving him every benefit of the doubt mean he wasn’t high as a kite when he hunted and killed Martin? It does not.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/newsone.com/2016433/george-zimmerman-drugs/amp/
 

EatTheRich

President
Yes, they are. Now the facts: https://www.cleveland.com/metro/2015/12/indisputable_images_of_tamir_r.html

If you are unable to acknowledge the facts and unable to stop propagating racist lies then there is no point to even respond to you.
So my article says that Rice didn’t point his toy gun at the officers. Your article says that prosecutors say Rice did point his toy gun at the officers. Both articles are accurate. Prosecutors work hand in hand with cops to terrorize the public into obeying the ruling class, so they systematically lie to cover up police misconduct as a matter of course.
 

Dino

Russian Asset
What was the lie? Does the fact that he wasn’t tested for drugs and that the police sabotaged any effort to secure a conviction by ignoring procedure and giving him every benefit of the doubt mean he wasn’t high as a kite when he hunted and killed Martin? It does not.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/newsone.com/2016433/george-zimmerman-drugs/amp/
You called him "intoxicated", without a shred of proof of that (either). Like most claims, you've made, not backed up by any facts.
You- like most lefties- have created a scanario by which Zimmerman's shooting was unjustified. It doesn't compare with the real circumstances, the witnessed testimony, or common sense.
You try to use delusions to paint others' opinions, be it to attack guns, attack the police or point fingers of racism, But it just isn't reality.
 

EatTheRich

President
You called him "intoxicated", without a shred of proof of that (either). Like most claims, you've made, not backed up by any facts.
You- like most lefties- have created a scanario by which Zimmerman's shooting was unjustified. It doesn't compare with the real circumstances, the witnessed testimony, or common sense.
You try to use delusions to paint others' opinions, be it to attack guns, attack the police or point fingers of racism, But it just isn't reality.
I just posted proof, which you ignored. You started from the premise that the shooting was justified, and then systematically ignored all the evidence that could not be shoehorned into the narrative you concocted to support that conclusion. I started from the facts, and concluded that the shooting was not justified.
 

Mick

The Right is always right
So my article says that Rice didn’t point his toy gun at the officers. Your article says that prosecutors say Rice did point his toy gun at the officers. Both articles are accurate. Prosecutors work hand in hand with cops to terrorize the public into obeying the ruling class, so they systematically lie to cover up police misconduct as a matter of course.
Jesus Christ, you are a left wing conspiracy nut. Now the actual photos are a mass conspiracy. Lulz
 
Top