Originally Posted by TheSquealer

You again, are 100% wrong. The sole eye witness Jonathan Good, already testified that Zimmerman was on bottom, Martin was on top. Zimmerman was yelling for help. Martin was beating the hell out of him. Additionally, all wounds on both parties support that version. The only reason he did not see the shooting was because he ran back inside and called the police. That call was also heard in court in its entirety.

All you're "armed"/"not armed" etc type arguments are 100% irrelevant to him calling the police, following Martin to guide the police to him and Martin then approaching him and attacking him and beating the shit out of him. You can't attack someone and be in the right when you have the option of walking in the opposite direction. Someone following you and being on the phone is not an imminent threat.... where someone physically attacking you and then being on top of you, slamming his head into the concrete is.

And by the way, i went through something similar where I almost beat someone to death with a pistol. He broke into my house, he attacked me first with a knife (someone i knew - and he was high on coke) and i just happened to have a .357 within arms reach, pushed him away and grabbed the gun, flipped the lights on and told him if he didn't walk away i was going to drop him. He charged me, knife in hand, threatening to kill me and instead of shooting, I hit him of the head with the pistol. He continued to try to stab me and i hit him, cutting his head open enough that he covered the whole place in blood before the police arrived. Because he was a bit immature - much like many people here, he started trying to explain why he was right. The police only had one question to him... "was he between you and the door?... no?,... you're under arrest". You can't argue that you are being attacked when you have the option of going in the opposite direction. Simple stuff.

The time leading up to that moment were completely irrelevant to the moment of the altercation. What my job was, why i was there, why he was there and so on is 100% irrelevant when it comes to the actual assault.

It's what happened in that exact moment that matters. That is what the case is about. Was Zimmerman justified in pulling out his pistol and shooting Martin. You have yet to explain why he wasn't based on the facts. You just keep making vague assertions as to his job, his job description, usuing inflammatory words like "stalking" (ignoring that he was talking to 911 almost the whole time) etc which is not relevant to the moment of him being attacked and having someone pound your head into the concrete.

You just don't want to understand and accept that.


And lets flip this around.

Your child was attacked. The dude is kicking his ass. Hes crying for help. He's getting beaten severely and feels he might be killed by his attacker. He pulls out a pistol and puts one round in his attacker. You going to call your child a murderer? Of course not. I rest my case.