This is the hilarious thing about this trial. You claim that you're somehow unbiased and that every "anti-Zimmerman sheep" is. Your entire post is riddled with betrayals to your own political and legal attitudes.
I personally don't even have a stake in this trial outcome. I personally don't think the evidence is there to convict on murder 2, but I think manslaughter is more than accounted for. I think it comes down to, "Nobody truly knows what happened, and there is contrary and inconsistent evidence on both sides of the case." For everything you've cited, I could just as easily cite some inconsistency with Zimmerman's account. The problem is that you're taking Zimmerman's word as full and unconditional truth for some reason or another. I'm not going to take a guess at why you're so helplessly willing to adopt Zimmerman's self-defense claim as absolute and that any other theory is so full of holes. You're obviously cherry-picking evidence to support the conclusion you came to when this all first happened. That's fine, but please don't claim that everybody else is indulging in bias but you're not. That's sad and delusional.
One of the biggest problems I have with this whole case is that pro-Zimmerman defense has turned from, "He's innocent because you can't prove otherwise!" into, "Trayvon was an evil hood rat that was destined to be killed one way or another because he was rotten and deserved it." You've hijacked the defense of an individual's self-protection and turned it into something wicked. That's the problem I have with this case. Every other Zimmerman acolyte is just as willing to hurl racist epithets and bigoted stereotypes as they are to say, "You haven't proved anything beyond a reasonable doubt." That's where your case is-- but you all take it somewhere disgusting.
But go on with your "Don't trust the liberal media" hype and other band-wagon, "Don't be a sheep!" talking points as you yourself are fed pre-digested opinions and societal conceptions. Just know that you're a bleeding hypocrite.
|