@RonSchweinlach @david_kenneth_d Trayvon was a violent criminal who noticed Zim watching him after he broke into cars and decided
@RonSchweinlach @david_kenneth_d circumstantial evidence is still valid evidence. Increases the probability that Trayvon attacked first
-
-
@HbdNrx@david_kenneth_d pretty flimsy I'd say. But ambiguity benefits Zimmerman since he killed the only person who could negate his story -
@RonSchweinlach
@david_kenneth_d given all those facts and an unbiased evaluation, the probability Zim struck first is near zero. -
@HbdNrx@david_kenneth_d after reading your page that is a huge reach. -
@RonSchweinlach
@david_kenneth_d in contrast, the best evidence the anti-Zim side has is, "he was creepy and might have followed Trayvon" -
@HbdNrx@david_kenneth_d well he definitely followed that's not in question. Also trayvon is dead so Zimmerman definitely killed him. -
@RonSchweinlach
@david_kenneth_d case closed, I guess -
@HbdNrx@david_kenneth_d there is no physical evidence of who "struck first". That ambiguity benefits the survivor. -
@RonSchweinlach
@david_kenneth_d Z would have known he'd get his ass kicked if he started something. He's no fighter, has no reason to punch - 13 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@HbdNrx @RonSchweinlach Ya know, besides all this, if BLM is about cop brutality, this entire case is irrelevant anyway. -
@david_kenneth_d @RonSchweinlach BLM is about black supremacy, of course
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.