Trayvon Martin

K

koooky

Member
Please dont anyone take this the wrong way, but I am sick of hearing about this case already. I am sick of the media bias. It seems Zimmerman is going to be tried in the media instead of in a court.

And who's to say it wasn't self defense? There have been reports that say Trayvon struck first, hit Zimmerman's head into the ground, and went for his gun(Zimmerman's). Tell the truth, if a 6'2" 17 year old black kid who you had never seen in your neighborhood hit you and slammed your head into the ground, wouldn't you shoot him as well if you felt your life was in danger?

Why is the media using pics of Trayvon from five years ago when he was 12-13 years old instead of his most recent facebook pics? Is it to make him appear younger and more innocent?

I really wish the media would just let the dust settle on this until there is a proper investigation. I found these two pics online--
View attachment 25164View attachment 25165
 
The instant Al Sharpton got involved (it was inevitable) all I could think of was "Tawana Brawley".
(Google the name if you're unfamiliar.)

I really think that the Martin family is going to get completely trampled in the impending shit-storm that the crowd around them is going to stimulate.
The tragedy is only gonna get worse, no seventeen year-old kids reputation can withstand the onslaught that the anti-Zimmerman camp is proposing to subject him (Zimmerman) to and you know damn well it's gonna be responded to and reciprocated.

Maybe the shooting was justified, maybe it wasn't...but the family is going to suffer for far longer than anybody truly deserves, simply because of the "movement" that has erupted surrounding this case. It's taken on a life of its own and I really don't think anybody who has truly suffered in this case is going to walk away without suffering further scars or humiliation.
 
UPDATE---

I have since learned that the pic of Trayvon is not him but another young man of the same name. My apologies.

But I think my point is still valid.

Why use a picture of him when he was 3-5 years younger and use an older picture of Zimmerman wearing "county orange"
 
Had Zimmerman stayed in his house and not chased after Martin, Martin would have gotten home safely with his skittles. Zimmerman has a history of violence and probably harassed Martin with that "what are you doing in MY neighborhood" crap. He probably also tried to subdue him. At the very least, he was suspiciously following him (when 911 told him not to).

And why would the fact that he's black have anything with whether or not you'd shoot him?
 
I only know 'bits' about this case as its in the states but from what I heard it seemed as though this is being billed as an attack on the black society. This is how it came over on the BBC news to someone outside it all. I saw angry people mostly black who were going mad about it and Zimmerman the bloke who did the shooting being billed as someone trigger happy perhaps.

Now reading here and thinking about this, if Mr Martin was running away then Zimmerman had no rights to chase him down and shoot him unless in the states you can do this? in the UK you are not allowed to chase the attacker or robber away and confront them / attack them as this is then classed as Vigilantism/vengence/revenge and not self defence. So the question would be was Zimmerman actually defending himself at the time or was he over emotional and chased this guy down killing him.

I dont know if the issue around Martin being black has anything to do with it or not? I sense it has nothing to do with it but then again I know America has history with racism so who knows. I do know that in the UK we have a famous case around a black young man killed approx 18 years ago called Stephen Lawrence that was full of errors by the police, possible corruption by them and a gang of white yobs who attacked this young man who was minding his own business at a local bus stop ... thankfully they put two of the fuckers behind bars earlier this year in a retrial, double jeopardy law not counted in. The attack was pure racial hatred and I mention this only in so far as the black part of society have never forgotten it and sometimes latch onto it when anything happens to a black person and I can understand sympathize with them on this level but dont agree it should be used to freely ... recently a white guy was shot in the chest and killed by armed Police, yet at the time this man was not armed at all and the police complaints association are looking into it as to why the cops shot him ... not much more said but you cant help but wonder if he was black more would now be done on that case.
 
magiksock;477621 said:
Had Zimmerman stayed in his house and not chased after Martin, Martin would have gotten home safely with his skittles. Zimmerman has a history of violence and probably harassed Martin with that "what are you doing in MY neighborhood" crap. He probably also tried to subdue him. At the very least, he was suspiciously following him (when 911 told him not to).

And why would the fact that he's black have anything with whether or not you'd shoot him?
Click to expand...


I think you are going by too many assumptions, just as easily as I could to argue that Zimmerman used self defense.

Zimmerman should have received a free ride downtown for a further investigation not simply take his statement and allowed to leave.

I made a point of saying black because Treyvon is a black kid. I was reducing it to what is currently known.

I don't understand what you mean by "suspiciously following him." What was suspicious about it? 911 KNEW Zimmerman was following him, they knew his stated reason--that there had been several break in in the area. Just as Traycon had a right to walk through there, Zimmerman had the right to follow him. What we don't know and can't assume is what happened next. Who confronted who. Who swung first. Was Zimmerman's gun visable or concealed. Too many questions. Even if Zimmerman tried to subdue Trayvon Zimmerman is still able to regain his right of self defense in certain situations.

To make matters worse, now you have the Black Panthers putting out a bounty on Zimmerman. Anyone involved in the offering of the bounty. The solicitation of kidnapping is a felony.

You also have Spike lee Retweeting what he thought was Zimmerman's address which turns out to be some elderly couple. I hope they sue the hell out of anyone tweeting their address. And what is Spike Lee's intent on tweeting his address? For someone to cash in on the bounty?
 
I don't think it has anything to do with being black? regardless you shoot someone shouldn't it be proven to be self-defense instead of staying in your home like it never happen but like it been switched are if a black guy did it they wouldn't won't him seeing the light of day especially in that state. But i agree with the pic thing you should use updated pics and I seen the size he's taller year but the shorter Zimmerman is about 60+ lbs heavier.
 
Sounds insane and really do laws not exist in your country to keep the media out of this? if it went to court surely all this shit flying about would unfairly jeporadize a case? also who are the black panthers?
 
I also heard they told him not to follow the kid the calls are online I heard I will view them
koooky;477633 said:
I think you are going by too many assumptions, just as easily as I could to argue that Zimmerman used self defense.

Zimmerman should have received a free ride downtown for a further investigation not simply take his statement and allowed to leave.

I made a point of saying black because Treyvon is a black kid. I was reducing it to what is currently known.

I don't understand what you mean by "suspiciously following him." What was suspicious about it? 911 KNEW Zimmerman was following him, they knew his stated reason--that there had been several break in in the area. Just as Traycon had a right to walk through there, Zimmerman had the right to follow him. What we don't know and can't assume is what happened next. Who confronted who. Who swung first. Was Zimmerman's gun visable or concealed. Too many questions. Even if Zimmerman tried to subdue Trayvon Zimmerman is still able to regain his right of self defense in certain situations.

To make matters worse, now you have the Black Panthers putting out a bounty on Zimmerman. Anyone involved in the offering of the bounty. The solicitation of kidnapping is a felony.

You also have Spike lee Retweeting what he thought was Zimmerman's address which turns out to be some elderly couple. I hope they sue the hell out of anyone tweeting their address. And what is Spike Lee's intent on tweeting his address? For someone to cash in on the bounty?
Click to expand...
 
You were there?
Saw the whole thing go down?

Why haven't you come forward then?

Justice needs a witness like you.

magiksock;477621 said:
Had Zimmerman stayed in his house and not chased after Martin, Martin would have gotten home safely with his skittles. Zimmerman has a history of violence and probably harassed Martin with that "what are you doing in MY neighborhood" crap. He probably also tried to subdue him. At the very least, he was suspiciously following him (when 911 told him not to).

And why would the fact that he's black have anything with whether or not you'd shoot him?
Click to expand...
 
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

Contains the full versions of these:

The 2011 Florida Statutes Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE View Entire Chapter

CHAPTER 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.
776.031 Use of force in defense of others.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.
776.05 Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.
776.051 Use of force in resisting arrest or making an arrest or in the execution of a legal duty; prohibition.
776.06 Deadly force.
776.07 Use of force to prevent escape.
776.08 Forcible felony.
776.085 Defense to civil action for damages; party convicted of forcible or attempted forcible felony.
 
MAXAMEYES;477643 said:
You were there?
Saw the whole thing go down?

Why haven't you come forward then?

Justice needs a witness like you.
Click to expand...

Please read my list carefully making silly statements. I used the word "probably" instead of stating what happened as fact.
 
koooky;477633 said:
I don't understand what you mean by "suspiciously following him." What was suspicious about it? 911 KNEW Zimmerman was following him, they knew his stated reason--that there had been several break in in the area. Just as Traycon had a right to walk through there, Zimmerman had the right to follow him. What we don't know and can't assume is what happened next. Who confronted who. Who swung first. Was Zimmerman's gun visable or concealed. Too many questions. Even if Zimmerman tried to subdue Trayvon Zimmerman is still able to regain his right of self defense in certain situations.
Click to expand...

What I mean by "suspiciously" following him is that Martin apparently knew he was being followed. If you've ever been followed by a stranger in a car while you were walking you would know that it's a pretty scary event. In short, zimmermans actions were probably suspicious to Martin.

I will agree with you that Zimmerman should have at least detained. Thats the whole issue. Had he been, this case would have never seen a news cycle.
 
MAXAMEYES;477644 said:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

Contains the full versions of these:

The 2011 Florida Statutes Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE View Entire Chapter

CHAPTER 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.
776.031 Use of force in defense of others.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.
776.05 Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.
776.051 Use of force in resisting arrest or making an arrest or in the execution of a legal duty; prohibition.
776.06 Deadly force.
776.07 Use of force to prevent escape.
776.08 Forcible felony.
776.085 Defense to civil action for damages; party convicted of forcible or attempted forcible felony.
Click to expand...

None of the things you have listed state that you can create an dangerous situation, then use deadly force because you bit off more than you can chew which is what most of the news seem to suggest.

Jeb Bush (former Governor of Florida for international [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words]'ers) has stated that this law should not protect Zimmerman.

The fact of the matter is that Martin would still be alive if Zimmerman had stayed in his house instead of chasing Martin. Zimmerman's poor judgement and disobedience lead to the death of a kid who was simply walking home from the store. Period.
 
magiksock;477652 said:
None of the things you have listed state that you can create an dangerous situation, then use deadly force because you bit off more than you can chew which is what most of the news seem to suggest.

Jeb Bush (former Governor of Florida for international [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words]'ers) has stated that this law should not protect Zimmerman.

The fact of the matter is that Martin would still be alive if Zimmerman had stayed in his house instead of chasing Martin. Zimmerman's poor judgement and disobedience lead to the death of a kid who was simply walking home from the store. Period.
Click to expand...



First--Jeb has said this without knowing all the facts--just like everyone else. If it is proved that Martin swung on and did endanger Zimmerman's life, then Jeb would be wrong.

According to the "newest report" just recently issued, Zimmerman was taken down town and was going to have manslaughter slapped on him but the DA said there was not enough evidence to charge him at the time so they let him go. If that's the case, and no new evidence comes to light, I believe Zimmerman will not be charged in this matter.


BTW--Why not comment on the Black Panther PUBLICLY putting a 10K bounty on Zimmerman. Should they not be charged as well?

This is what I think happened--

Zimmerman follows and confronts Martin
Martin swung on Zimmerman
They struggled
Martin ends up on top beating Zimmerman while on the ground.
Zimmerman goes for his gun
They struggle with the gun
The gun goes off killing Martin OR Zimmerman is able to point and pull the trigger at Martin



This is my opinion based on--

One eye witness who has come forward saying he saw them struggling with the man in red(Zimmerman) on the bottom. He went in to call 911 when the shot was fired.

One 911 call in which a woman says there is a struggle going on outside but she cant see them. But a man(Zimmerman IMO) yelling for help and then a gunshot.

This is only my opinion of what happened that night.
 
REDZULU2003;477629 said:
I only know 'bits' about this case as its in the states but from what I heard it seemed as though this is being billed as an attack on the black society. This is how it came over on the BBC news to someone outside it all. I saw angry people mostly black who were going mad about it and Zimmerman the bloke who did the shooting being billed as someone trigger happy perhaps.

Now reading here and thinking about this, if Mr Martin was running away then Zimmerman had no rights to chase him down and shoot him unless in the states you can do this? in the UK you are not allowed to chase the attacker or robber away and confront them / attack them as this is then classed as Vigilantism/vengence/revenge and not self defence. So the question would be was Zimmerman actually defending himself at the time or was he over emotional and chased this guy down killing him.

I dont know if the issue around Martin being black has anything to do with it or not? I sense it has nothing to do with it but then again I know America has history with racism so who knows. I do know that in the UK we have a famous case around a black young man killed approx 18 years ago called Stephen Lawrence that was full of errors by the police, possible corruption by them and a gang of white yobs who attacked this young man who was minding his own business at a local bus stop ... thankfully they put two of the fuckers behind bars earlier this year in a retrial, double jeopardy law not counted in. The attack was pure racial hatred and I mention this only in so far as the black part of society have never forgotten it and sometimes latch onto it when anything happens to a black person and I can understand sympathize with them on this level but dont agree it should be used to freely ... recently a white guy was shot in the chest and killed by armed Police, yet at the time this man was not armed at all and the police complaints association are looking into it as to why the cops shot him ... not much more said but you cant help but wonder if he was black more would now be done on that case.
Click to expand...

What red says makes sense. The Lawrence case in the UK was and still is a big deal with regards to racism. The fact is it was a racist and discussing attack and eventually it was brought to some sort of justice thanks to the "british" persistence and anal righteousness haha. However red is also right in saying that often the Lawrence case is used/latched onto too much and is irrelevant to any other case. Again red is right haha! what's this chasing people around with a gun and killing them about!?! What kind of a half decent man could follow someone and kill them and claim some sort of self defence? We cannot carry weapons in the UK whatsoever, but we could still pick up a kitchen knife and follow someone and stab them multiple times in the heart, but thats not right is it? If you have had the worst day of your life why not spit, slap, throw a stone or shoot a leg if you really really had to before driving off?
 
forSmybaby;477660 said:
What kind of a half decent man could follow someone and kill them and claim some sort of self defence?
Click to expand...

My point exactly! The guy followed Martin around in his SUV while Martin was walking. Whatever Martin did to Zimmerman was actually self defense. Although newly a released video seems to suggest that Zimmerman wasn't physically as "beat up" as he reported. In any case, Zimmerman created the dangerous situation by following a man in his car while he walked home at night then confronting him with a gun.
 
koooky;477659 said:
First--Jeb has said this without knowing all the facts--just like everyone else. If it is proved that Martin swung on and did endanger Zimmerman's life, then Jeb would be wrong.
Click to expand...

Jeb Bush is not a dummy. He doesn't have a history of commenting on contentious topics that he doesn't know about. Also, the law was enacted when he was governor. He supported the legislation. I think he has more knowledge of the law than we do.



koooky;477659 said:
BTW--Why not comment on the Black Panther PUBLICLY putting a 10K bounty on Zimmerman. Should they not be charged as well?
Click to expand...
I try not to make a point of commenting on every crazy person or group out there. What they are advocating is wrong. But I'm trying to focus on the case and not the reactions of people about the case.


koooky;477659 said:
This is what I think happened--

Zimmerman follows and confronts Martin
Martin swung on Zimmerman
They struggled
Martin ends up on top beating Zimmerman while on the ground.
Zimmerman goes for his gun
They struggle with the gun
The gun goes off killing Martin OR Zimmerman is able to point and pull the trigger at Martin
Click to expand...

This is small ammendment of your rendition--

Zimmerman follows Martin in his car
Martin notices Zimmeran follwing him and get scared and runs (the 911 call states that Martin started running while Zimmerman was following him. The 911 operator asks him to stop following him).
He speeds up, jumps out of the car and confronts Martin (probably showing his gun). The fact that Zimmerman considers Martin a threat and he had his gun with him leads me to believe this.
An argument ensues
Zimmerman gets too close
Martin swung on Zimmerman
They struggled
Martin ends up on top beating Zimmerman while on the ground.
Zimmerman goes for his gun
They struggle with the gun
The gun goes off killing Martin OR Zimmerman is able to point and pull the trigger at Martin
[/QUOTE]


The point of the matter is that Zimmerman created the situation. I can't walk into your house with a gun, fight with you, then kill you in "self defense". The reasoning is that I would be responsible for creating the dangerous situation. Zimmerman did the same thing. He followed an unarmed man at night in his car. Jumped out and confronted the man and wonders why the man fought back! Martin was probably scared shitless. I know I would have.

Not only that, but Zimmerman called the dude a "fucking Coon" on the 911 tape. There a lot of debate of whether or not he said it, but its pretty damn clear. Watch this video.
He says it at 1:52 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNI5CA5jijw
While that isn't a crime, it is telling.
 
magiksock;477692 said:
Jeb Bush is not a dummy. He doesn't have a history of commenting on contentious topics that he doesn't know about. Also, the law was enacted when he was governor. He supported the legislation. I think he has more knowledge of the law than we do.


I try not to make a point of commenting on every crazy person or group out there. What they are advocating is wrong. But I'm trying to focus on the case and not the reactions of people about the case.




This is small ammendment of your rendition--

Zimmerman follows Martin in his car
Martin notices Zimmeran follwing him and get scared and runs (the 911 call states that Martin started running while Zimmerman was following him. The 911 operator asks him to stop following him).
He speeds up, jumps out of the car and confronts Martin (probably showing his gun). The fact that Zimmerman considers Martin a threat and he had his gun with him leads me to believe this.
An argument ensues
Zimmerman gets too close
Martin swung on Zimmerman
They struggled
Martin ends up on top beating Zimmerman while on the ground.
Zimmerman goes for his gun
They struggle with the gun
The gun goes off killing Martin OR Zimmerman is able to point and pull the trigger at Martin
Click to expand...



I am not debating whether Bush knows more about the law or not, I am merely stating that since he, like the rest of us, do not know all of the facts of the case, he is in no position to say what law applies or not. Until we know what exactly transpired, no one knows how or what laws should be applied



Your timeline and mine have one thing clear in common. We are both only guessing as to what happened. I do not believe that Zimmerman approached with his gun drawn. If he did then I would tend to agree with you on the rest of the events.
Since there were many robberies in the area, how would Zimmerman know that Treyvon was unarmed? Just because Zimmerman confronted Martin and asked him what he was doing, does not give Martin the right to attack. There is no "immenent danger" unless as you say the gun was drawn.
Your example of walking into my house with a gun is apples and oranges. Zimmerman lived there. Not Martin. Zimmerman has a right to be wary of anyone unknown to be walking down the street. He does not have the right however to point a gun at that person. Which we may never know if that happened


Not only that, but Zimmerman called the dude a "fucking Coon" on the 911 tape. There a lot of debate of whether or not he said it, but its pretty damn clear. Watch this video.
He says it at 1:52 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNI5CA5jijw
While that isn't a crime, it is telling.[/QUOTE]

Hmm--Zimmerman calling Martin a "fucking coon" is no more relevant than Martin having allegedly swung on a bus driver, stole some jewlry, or been suspended from school for something drug related. But those would be just as telling as well as to Martin's attitude.
 
Last edited:
magiksock;477689 said:
My point exactly! The guy followed Martin around in his SUV while Martin was walking. Whatever Martin did to Zimmerman was actually self defense. Although newly a released video seems to suggest that Zimmerman wasn't physically as "beat up" as he reported. In any case, Zimmerman created the dangerous situation by following a man in his car while he walked home at night then confronting him with a gun.
Click to expand...

I disagree with you almost entirely here.
Martin does not have the right to beat a man on the ground if that man has not attacked him. You are assuming the gun was drawn. If he only confronted Martin and asked him what he was doing, then there is no right to swing on Zimmerman or beat him on the ground.
The EMT's treated and cleaned Zimmerman's wounds at the scene.
It was a police officer that visually reported the wounds, not Zimmerman.

If there is a stranger in my neighborhood, following him may not be the smartest thing in the world, this I readily admit. But me following him does not give him any right to punch or attack me. That is called escalation. The person on the receiving end of the escalation has a right to self defense and can even regain the right to self defense if he is the initial attacker.
 
So you're saying its ok for someone to drive slowly behind your mother/girlfriend/sister/wife for several minutes while she is walking or jogging. And when she gets scared and starts running, that person is within their rights to run after her and capture her? Furthermore, if you mother/sister/wife fights back, its OK for her to be killed, especially if she her facebook page said something that you might not agree with? GTFOH. Your argument doesn't even make good sense.

It shouldn't matter what Trayvon did or didn't do after Zimmerman confronted him. By that point he was probably scared for his life. That is the real definition of self defense. Zimmerman was on the offense by chasing an innocent kid. He doesn't police training, but injected himself in a situation that calls for it.

But for shits and giggles, lets pretend that Trayvon turned the tables on Zimmerman after chased him down. Zimmerman said that he was beating him in the sidewalk and shot him as he was on top of him. Why doesn't Zimmerman have any blood on him. If you shoot someone at point blank range while they are on top of you, you will be bloody as heck. Why does the video of Zimmerman walking into the station not show him in a bloody shirt? Where is the big cut from his head being banged into the concrete
 
koooky;477753 said:
I disagree with you almost entirely here.
Martin does not have the right to beat a man on the ground if that man has not attacked him. You are assuming the gun was drawn. If he only confronted Martin and asked him what he was doing, then there is no right to swing on Zimmerman or beat him on the ground.
The EMT's treated and cleaned Zimmerman's wounds at the scene.
It was a police officer that visually reported the wounds, not Zimmerman.

If there is a stranger in my neighborhood, following him may not be the smartest thing in the world, this I readily admit. But me following him does not give him any right to punch or attack me. That is called escalation. The person on the receiving end of the escalation has a right to self defense and can even regain the right to self defense if he is the initial attacker.
Click to expand...

The guy was chasing after Martin after Martin got scared and started running. What would you have done if I was running after you at night time yelling at you? I'm not making this up, its in the 911 tape.
 
Last edited:
You know what they say about arguing on the internet...
I'm about worn out on it. I don't think any minds are getting changed about this subject from either side. I'm really here to make my dick big not to argue about shit
 
magiksock;477759 said:
You know what they say about arguing on the internet...
I'm about worn out on it. I don't think any minds are getting changed about this subject from either side. I'm really here to make my dick big not to argue about shit
Click to expand...

haha good on you..
 
The one thing I find very confusing, bizarre really, is all these protestors and their signs. All of them calling for justice for Trayvon. What gives? I mean, didn't someone already serve that little thug justice?

THIS EARNED HIM A TWO-WEEK BAN.

Rather than delete this, I left it in place as an example of the type of trifling, hate-filled, ignorant bullshit that will not be tolerated on [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words]. Please, everybody; take note.[/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Looks like it will turn out to be very interesting case. In Britain we have a very intriguing case with a man accused of having his wife killed off on there honeymoon while in South Africa. Occurred in 2010 and the guy is sectioned currently under mental health act awaiting appeals on him being sent to South Africa for trial. Just Google it the surname is Deswani.

A docu was on t.v tonight for 1 hour about it all incl evidence not released before and how on earth this programme was allowed to air is a mystery when a trial has never even started, to me it can damage his case unfairly if anyone in South Africa sees it. Turns out imho the docu doesn't damage him but to me personally shows he is innocent and the taxi driver is a scheming piece of shit wanting to save time in jail by cooperating with cops for less time by jibber jabber on the husband ... interesting case with many twists and turns, kinda reminded me of this one in the states as many little pieces of detail may be the most vital evidence i.e did Zimmerman have the gun already drawn or draw it in actual self defense etc.
 
I saw another case where the police killed a guy in a car that was unarmed maybe happen within the last 2 years I forgot the name of the guy though Mark Duggan I think it was
REDZULU2003;477782 said:
Looks like it will turn out to be very interesting case. In Britain we have a very intriguing case with a man accused of having his wife killed off on there honeymoon while in South Africa. Occurred in 2010 and the guy is sectioned currently under mental health act awaiting appeals on him being sent to South Africa for trial. Just Google it the surname is Deswani.

A docu was on t.v tonight for 1 hour about it all incl evidence not released before and how on earth this programme was allowed to air is a mystery when a trial has never even started, to me it can damage his case unfairly if anyone in South Africa sees it. Turns out imho the docu doesn't damage him but to me personally shows he is innocent and the taxi driver is a scheming piece of shit wanting to save time in jail by cooperating with cops for less time by jibber jabber on the husband ... interesting case with many twists and turns, kinda reminded me of this one in the states as many little pieces of detail may be the most vital evidence i.e did Zimmerman have the gun already drawn or draw it in actual self defense etc.
Click to expand...
 
Yeah Mark Duggan was another last year who the cops shot which eventually started the London-Birmingham-Manchester riots. Still no cops been prosecuted for that!
 
Dapper Dan;494407 said:
God damn vigilantes
They just cause trouble
Click to expand...


You don't even know the half of it! Believe me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top