1.) There's no way he knew he was a child..errrr 17 year old (adult). 2.) Based on the facts, it is justifiable Take your garbage elsewhere.
Rash of burglaries and thefts doesn't justify him following Martin? Who in the hell is the dispatcher to tell him who he can and can't follow? Is following someone illegal? No. Take that else where. Zimmerman will walk and you can't handle that.
1. You can't prove that. 2. The current facts do not justify anything because we still don't know enough of what happened.
he had a right to follow Martin, so he doesn't need another good reason your point is completely and totally irrelevant
No, it isn't and has been shown to you time and time again. I have the right to smoke and become a smoker, that doesn't mean I have a good reason to do it. I should expect to pay higher insurance etc. There are consequences for doing things you shouldn't even if you have a right to do it. Any time you do something that you were advised by the person representing law enforcement there isn't really a good reason to do it, and you may have some unpleasant consequences.
Where is it explicitly stated that I or anybody else has the right to follow whoever I like? I see where I have the right to vote, a trial, bear arms, etc. Where is it stated in any amendment, law, rule, etc. that I or anybody else has the right to follow whoever I please. As you request to others so often, especially in this thread, quit making up facts.
ok now you're trying to argue an obscure, twisted technicality of a play on words. Just goes to show you're emotionally invested in this, and have lost your ability to truly look at this objectively. If somebody has a right to follow, you don't also need a good reason. Then you try to overgeneralize and claim that there's NEVER a good reason to do something that a non-emergency dispatcher says. That's just bull. Sorry, but it is, and you know it. Your bias is clear for all to see.
After being shown that having a right to do something and good reason to do something are two separate things you pull this crap? It's laughable. Do you support not following the wishes of the official law enforcement representative? I'll take that attitude of yours into account in any future threads about cops abusing their authority.
Can you please just do me a favor Please pick a name for the non-emergency dispatcher. You try to embellish what you call them in each post. hey thanks, guy
The official representative of the Police. This is probably the basis of the FBI investigation into the possibility of a hate crime.
The OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OF THE MOST HIGH AUTHORITY SUPREME GUARD GOLD-RIBBON POLICE FORCE lol pick a name, FB and mcmark
I see. You've given up. That's fine. Thanks for playing. You've been demonstrating all along you weren't up to the game.
all along I've been arguing for more facts unlike you I haven't picked a side we still lack enough facts but GZ did have the right to pursue, so you have made no point
