Zimmerman bond revoked

desert dude

Well-Known Member
If it occurred exactly as you said, and only as you said, that would be murder. But we already know, by EVERYBODY"S account that it did not happen that way. The insult at the end will end our conversation.

Insults are par for the course here. Thick skin is required, my friend, thick skin.
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
I think you are just bored and trolling, but... The only lie, and that is debatable, I have seen is the statement about the defense fund. Are there more?
Well his story about being attacked from behind on the way back to his truck smells more like bullshit than a cattle farm, it just seems like anytime he opens his mouth, even the people around him are like "wft?!".

Either way, if you're gonna openly lie about how many free $$$'s you got, you're gonna lie to get out of a murder 2 conviction.
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
I think you are just bored and trolling, but... The only lie, and that is debatable, I have seen is the statement about the defense fund. Are there more?
He'll make up something without any proof, you'll notice they always steer away from the physical evidence. We're just feeding the trolls, watch them jump and posture every time we post. Ha ha!
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
Either way, if you're gonna openly lie about how many free $$$'s you got, you're gonna lie to get out of a murder 2 conviction.
That would be true if he actually did that. He was never asked directly or even asked to confirm what his wife was testifying to. When you're in court you only give answers when your asked, he wasn't so he didn't lie. Unless he's responsible for everything that anyone says under oath, is that how it works in this country? Nope.

I really couldn't care less what position you have, but condemning him over his wife's eagerness to get him out of jail is misguided.
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Insults are par for the course here. Thick skin is required, my friend, thick skin.
True, but I don't care to feed the trolls. So, I am going to give his idiotic postings the attention they deserve. I thought he might be lucid there for a minute, but I was mistaken.
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
True, but I don't care to feed the trolls. So, I am going to give his idiotic postings the attention they deserve. I thought he might be lucid there for a minute, but I was mistaken.
Pity out of all of your posts not one makes a valid or logical point.

I made a very valid "Once a liar always a liar" point and if you choose to dismiss it in your Zimm-fellating head then that's fine, but if you're just gonna just attack the poster instead of the content, then trust me, if you wanna play that game I'm alot better at it than you are ;)
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Pity out of all of your posts not one makes a valid or logical point.

I made a very valid "Once a liar always a liar" point and if you choose to dismiss it in your Zimm-fellating head then that's fine, but if you're just gonna just attack the poster instead of the content, then trust me, if you wanna play that game I'm alot better at it than you are ;)
check out red's growing adventures.

https://www.rollitup.org/newbie-central/535411-trimming-scrog.html

he thinks clipping a few branches away is going to make a plant go hermie.

:lol:
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
Pity out of all of your posts not one makes a valid or logical point.

I made a very valid "Once a liar always a liar" point and if you choose to dismiss it in your Zimm-fellating head then that's fine, but if you're just gonna just attack the poster instead of the content, then trust me, if you wanna play that game I'm alot better at it than you are ;)
H, for the prior 6,000 posts or so on this subject in the "Trayvon" thread you have been on the side of reason. I find it hard to believe that Zimmerman's wife's lie about the content of their paypal account would somehow change your mind about the fundamental facts of the case. The only conclusion I can make is that you are trolling now for laughs, or you were trolling earlier for laughs. Either case it OK by me.

Now that you have decided on Z's guilt, how do you reconcile the physical evidence, eye witness accounts, police reports, etc, all of which corroborate Zimmerman's account of that night?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
H, for the prior 6,000 posts or so on this subject in the "Trayvon" thread you have been on the side of reason. I find it hard to believe that Zimmerman's wife's lie about the content of their paypal account would somehow change your mind about the fundamental facts of the case. The only conclusion I can make is that you are trolling now for laughs, or you were trolling earlier for laughs. Either case it OK by me.

Now that you have decided on Z's guilt, how do you reconcile the physical evidence, eye witness accounts, police reports, etc, all of which corroborate Zimmerman's account of that night?
dude, you don't even have zimmboy's account of that night, and you claim you are on the side of reason?

LOL!

douche.
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
H, for the prior 6,000 posts or so on this subject in the "Trayvon" thread you have been on the side of reason. I find it hard to believe that Zimmerman's wife's lie about the content of their paypal account would somehow change your mind about the fundamental facts of the case. The only conclusion I can make is that you are trolling now for laughs, or you were trolling earlier for laughs. Either case it OK by me.

Now that you have decided on Z's guilt, how do you reconcile the physical evidence, eye witness accounts, police reports, etc, all of which corroborate Zimmerman's account of that night?
And the side of reason is the side that allows people to follow, confront then shoot people who are out for a stroll?

That combined with his edam-like story means I'd rather side with the "unreasonable" side.

I still don't think he'll go down for it, but I do think he should've just left Trayvon alone, rationalisation of this event beyond that point is kinda like winning a special Olympics medal, it's nice and all but you're still a retard (not you personally, the example person).
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Pity out of all of your posts not one makes a valid or logical point. I made a very valid "Once a liar always a liar" point and if you choose to dismiss it in your Zimm-fellating head then that's fine, but if you're just gonna just attack the poster instead of the content, then trust me, if you wanna play that game I'm alot better at it than you are ;)
See what I mean? He thinks that's a valid point. If any of you has ever lied once, every thing you say afterward must be a lie. Tell you what, Harrekin, when you make a valid point, I'll be glad to tell you. Even UB can tell you I will concede a VALID point. Note I said he can, I doubt he will. Until then, I'll just let you go on without reply, as I don't see you being receptive to reason or reality. In a few I'll be too toasted to reply, but I promise I'll get back to you.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
See what I mean? He thinks that's a valid point. If any of you has ever lied once, every thing you say afterward must be a lie. Tell you what, Harrekin, when you make a valid point, I'll be glad to tell you. Even UB can tell you I will concede a VALID point. Note I said he can, I doubt he will. Until then, I'll just let you go on without reply, as I don't see you being receptive to reason or reality.
have you lied under oath before?

kinda different then telling your friend you think his SCROG is nice, when you can tell it's crap.
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
I just don't get it. You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture. His wife lied under oath not him.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I just don't get it. You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture. His wife lied under oath not him.
and he sat their like a potted plant and benefitted from it after conspiring with her. conspiracy is a crime.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member

  • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

    • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

      • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

        • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

          • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

            • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

              • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                  • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                    • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                      • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                        • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                          • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                            • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                              • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                  • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                    • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                      • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                        • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                          • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                            • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                              • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                  • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                    • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                      • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                        • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                          • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                            • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                              • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                  • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                    • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                      • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                        • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                          • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                            • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                              • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                  • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                    • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                      • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                        • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                          • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                            • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                              • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                  • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                    • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                      • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                        • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                          • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                            • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                              • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                                • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                                  • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                                    • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                                      • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                                        • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                                          • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                                            • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                                              • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​

                                                                                                                                • You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.​































































































































































































































































































































 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
I just don't get it. You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture. His wife lied under oath not him.
You mean the witness statements that saw Zimbot on top of Martin AFTER the gunshot? Or the ones who didn't really see anything?

Just cos Zimbot is clearly a shit fighter doesn't mean Martin attacked him. What about the passport issue? Judge may have bought that shit, doesn't mean it's true either.

I tried to give Zimbot the benefit of the doubt Red, I even tried to defend him months ago...but to be honest, the more I thought about it, the more holes I found and the more I came to believe he should've just stayed in his truck.

Even Libertarians (who believe in absolute personal freedom) have a non-aggression principle, and following someone with a gun, confronting them and shooting them is considered offensive. What was Martins crime? Literally and figuratively he was doing NOTHING. Even if he was doing something the cops were literally what 5 mins away?

He REALLY didn't want that asshole getting away, one way or another.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
You mean the witness statements that saw Zimbot on top of Martin AFTER the gunshot? Or the ones who didn't really see anything?

Just cos Zimbot is clearly a shit fighter doesn't mean Martin attacked him. What about the passport issue? Judge may have bought that shit, doesn't mean it's true either.

I tried to give Zimbot the benefit of the doubt Red, I even tried to defend him months ago...but to be honest, the more I thought about it, the more holes I found and the more I came to believe he should've just stayed in his truck.

Even Libertarians (who believe in absolute personal freedom) have a non-aggression principle, and following someone with a gun, confronting them and shooting them is considered offensive. What was Martins crime? Literally and figuratively he was doing NOTHING. Even if he was doing something the cops were literally what 5 mins away?

He REALLY didn't want that asshole getting away, one way or another.
the cops were about 30 seconds to a minute away.
 
Top