is some of the best.
The current argument is that, hey, "maybe" Trayvon felt threatened because George had the gun pulled early on!! huh? huh? .....
....
So he saw that George Zimmerman was wielding a gun.... and he attacked him?
What unarmed person outside of your favorite action film goes towards a person they see wielding a gun?
Especially when they have
four
minutes
to run.
So when do you think George pulled the gun? And what do you think Trayvon's reaction was?
So far, there is only the most random collection of desperate and disparate delusions allowing those attempting to justify their initial (and, therefore, continuing) blind support for Trayvon Martin and for a murder conviction for George Zimmerman to continue to hold their position.
That's the funniest part of the prosecution's case. Embedded directly in the central part of the argument is a prosecution admittance that they themselves have all kinds of "reasonable doubt" regarding exactly what happened in those crucial moments. They don't know. "We the prosecution have serious doubts about what happened in those crucial moments, but you the jury should have no reasonable doubt regarding same."
Funniest thing ever.
No comments:
Post a Comment