Rumpole wrote:
As Sundance said at CTH.....
sundance says:
May 30, 2013 at 11:10 pm
I thought Reverend Al did really well.
Of course he did. O'Mara is bound by the law in terms of what he can say about the case. The good reverend can spout off whatever the hell he wants and misrepresent whatever the hell he wants and throw out whatever strawmen he wants in order to put O'Mara in a "gotcha" type moment.
I understand why O'Mara wants to go on these types of shows, effectively trying to debate the opposition; quite frankly though, it's a losing proposition for him. The opposition doesn't care about the truth. It doesn't matter how many times O'Mara corrects them in terms of the law and known evidence, they will continue to fall back on their fallacies to show Zimmerman is wrong/guilty no matter what the story line is.
Rumpole wrote:
The fact that George’s character does not suggest he would hunt down a black teen, just to shoot and kill him is irrelevant….. in fact even if George was just walking past… it’s STILL his fault….. it would never have happened if George wasn’t there…. simple as that.
George had no right putting his nose in the very place an angry Trayvon was about to thrust his fist.
This is the bottom line for those looking to convict Zimmerman. They can't comprehend that someone can follow someone else and then still claim self defense. It doesn't matter to them what person B was doing. Person B is dead, ergo person A needs to be punished, come hell or high water.
You can see this in terms of the scheme narrative changing as the evidence changes.
Zimmerman was racist and profiledZimmerman hunted him downW8 shows that Trayvon was screamingTrayvon is innocent and not violentTrayvon doesn't use drugs...
Oh, well his drug use, violence, and gun collection is completely normal