Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: pro nitrousADRL on April 26, 2012, 09:12:40 AM
-
SANFORD, Florida (Reuters) - A pit bull named Big Boi began menacing George and Shellie Zimmerman in the fall of 2009.
The first time the dog ran free and cornered Shellie in their gated community in Sanford, Florida, George called the owner to complain. The second time, Big Boi frightened his mother-in-law's dog. Zimmerman called Seminole County Animal Services and bought pepper spray. The third time he saw the dog on the loose, he called again. An officer came to the house, county records show.
"Don't use pepper spray," he told the Zimmermans, according to a friend. "It'll take two or three seconds to take effect, but a quarter second for the dog to jump you," he said.
"Get a gun."
That November, the Zimmermans completed firearms training at a local lodge and received concealed-weapons gun permits. In early December, another source close to them told Reuters, the couple bought a pair of guns. George picked a Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm handgun, a popular, lightweight weapon.
By June 2011, Zimmerman's attention had shifted from a loose pit bull to a wave of robberies that rattled the community, called the Retreat at Twin Lakes. The homeowners association asked him to launch a neighborhood watch, and Zimmerman would begin to carry the Kel-Tec on his regular, dog-walking patrol - a violation of neighborhood watch guidelines but not a crime.
Few of his closest neighbors knew he carried a gun - until two months ago.
On February 26, George Zimmerman shot and killed unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin in what Zimmerman says was self-defense. The furor that ensued has consumed the country and prompted a re-examination of guns, race and self-defense laws enacted in nearly half the United States.
During the time Zimmerman was in hiding, his detractors defined him as a vigilante who had decided Martin was suspicious merely because he was black. After Zimmerman was finally arrested on a charge of second-degree murder more than six weeks after the shooting, prosecutors portrayed him as a violent and angry man who disregarded authority by pursuing the 17-year-old.
But a more nuanced portrait of Zimmerman has emerged from a Reuters investigation into Zimmerman's past and a series of incidents in the community in the months preceding the Martin shooting.
Based on extensive interviews with relatives, friends, neighbors, schoolmates and co-workers of Zimmerman in two states, law enforcement officials, and reviews of court documents and police reports, the story sheds new light on the man at the center of one of the most controversial homicide cases in America.
The 28-year-old insurance-fraud investigator comes from a deeply Catholic background and was taught in his early years to do right by those less fortunate. He was raised in a racially integrated household and himself has black roots through an Afro-Peruvian great-grandfather - the father of the maternal grandmother who helped raise him.
A criminal justice student who aspired to become a judge, Zimmerman also concerned himself with the safety of his neighbors after a series of break-ins committed by young African-American men.
Though civil rights demonstrators have argued Zimmerman should not have prejudged Martin, one black neighbor of the Zimmermans said recent history should be taken into account.
"Let's talk about the elephant in the room. I'm black, OK?" the woman said, declining to be identified because she anticipated backlash due to her race. She leaned in to look a reporter directly in the eyes. "There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."
"MIXED" HOUSEHOLD
George Michael Zimmerman was born in 1983 to Robert and Gladys Zimmerman, the third of four children. Robert Zimmerman Sr. was a U.S. Army veteran who served in Vietnam in 1970, and was stationed at Fort Myer in Arlington, Virginia, in 1975 with Gladys Mesa's brother George. Zimmerman Sr. also served two tours in Korea, and spent the final 10 years of his 22-year military career in the Pentagon, working for the Department of Defense, a family member said.
In his final years in Virginia before retiring to Florida, Robert Zimmerman served as a magistrate in Fairfax County's 19th Judicial District.
Robert and Gladys met in January 1975, when George Mesa brought along his army buddy to his sister's birthday party. She was visiting from Peru, on vacation from her job there as a physical education teacher. Robert was a Baptist, Gladys was Catholic. They soon married, in a Catholic ceremony in Alexandria, and moved to nearby Manassas.
Gladys came to lead a small but growing Catholic Hispanic enclave within the All Saints Catholic Church parish in the late 1970s, where she was involved in the church's outreach programs. Gladys would bring young George along with her on "home visits" to poor families, said a family friend, Teresa Post.
"It was part of their upbringing to know that there are people in need, people more in need than themselves," said Post, a Peruvian immigrant who lived with the Zimmermans for a time.
Post recalls evening prayers before dinner in the ethnically diverse Zimmerman household, which included siblings Robert Jr., Grace, and Dawn. "It wasn't only white or only Hispanic or only black - it was mixed," she said.
Zimmerman's maternal grandmother, Cristina, who had lived with the Zimmermans since 1978, worked as a babysitter for years during Zimmerman's childhood. For several years she cared for two African-American girls who ate their meals at the Zimmerman house and went back and forth to school each day with the Zimmerman children.
"They were part of the household for years, until they were old enough to be on their own," Post said.
Zimmerman served as an altar boy at All Saints from age 7 to 17, church members said.
"He wasn't the type where, you know, 'I'm being forced to do this,' and a dragging-his-feet Catholic," said Sandra Vega, who went to high school with George and his siblings. "He was an altar boy for years, and then worked in the rectory too. He has a really good heart."
George grew up bilingual, and by age 10 he was often called to the Haydon Elementary School principal's office to act as a translator between administrators and immigrant parents. At 14 he became obsessed with becoming a Marine, a relative said, joining the after-school ROTC program at Grace E. Metz Middle School and polishing his boots by night. At 15, he worked three part-time jobs - in a Mexican restaurant, for the rectory, and washing cars - on nights and weekends, to save up for a car.
After graduating from Osbourn High School in 2001, Zimmerman moved to Lake Mary, Florida, a town neighboring Sanford. His parents purchased a retirement home there in 2002, in part to bring Cristina, who suffers from arthritis, to a warmer climate.
YOUNG INSURANCE AGENT
On his own at 18, George got a job at an insurance agency and began to take classes at night to earn a license to sell insurance. He grew friendly with a real estate agent named Lee Ann Benjamin, who shared office space in the building, and later her husband, John Donnelly, a Sanford attorney.
"George impressed me right off the bat as just a real go-getter," Donnelly said. "He was working days and taking all these classes at night, passing all the insurance classes, not just for home insurance, but auto insurance and everything. He wanted to open his own office - and he did."
In 2004, Zimmerman partnered with an African-American friend and opened up an Allstate insurance satellite office, Donnelly said.
Then came 2005, and a series of troubles. Zimmerman's business failed, he was arrested, and he broke off an engagement with a woman who filed a restraining order against him.
That July, Zimmerman was charged with resisting arrest, violence, and battery of an officer after shoving an undercover alcohol-control agent who was arresting an under-age friend of Zimmerman's at a bar. He avoided conviction by agreeing to participate in a pre-trial diversion program that included anger-management classes.
In August, Zimmerman's fiancee at the time, Veronica Zuazo, filed a civil motion for a restraining order alleging domestic violence. Zimmerman reciprocated with his own order on the same grounds, and both orders were granted. The relationship ended.
In 2007 he married Shellie Dean, a licensed cosmetologist, and in 2009 the couple rented a townhouse in the Retreat at Twin Lakes. Zimmerman had bounced from job to job for a couple of years, working at a car dealership and a mortgage company. At times, according to testimony from Shellie at a bond hearing for Zimmerman last week, the couple filed for unemployment benefits.
Zimmerman enrolled in Seminole State College in 2009, and in December 2011 he was permitted to participate in a school graduation ceremony, despite being a course credit shy of his associate's degree in criminal justice. Zimmerman was completing that course credit when the shooting occurred.
On March 22, nearly a month after the shooting and with the controversy by then swirling nationwide, the school issued a press release saying it was taking the "unusual, but necessary" step of withdrawing Zimmerman's enrollment, citing "the safety of our students on campus as well as for Mr. Zimmerman."
A NEIGHBORHOOD IN FEAR
By the summer of 2011, Twin Lakes was experiencing a rash of burglaries and break-ins. Previously a family-friendly, first-time homeowner community, it was devastated by the recession that hit the Florida housing market, and transient renters began to occupy some of the 263 town houses in the complex. Vandalism and occasional drug activity were reported, and home values plunged. One resident who bought his home in 2006 for $250,000 said it was worth $80,000 today.
At least eight burglaries were reported within Twin Lakes in the 14 months prior to the Trayvon Martin shooting, according to the Sanford Police Department. Yet in a series of interviews, Twin Lakes residents said dozens of reports of attempted break-ins and would-be burglars casing homes had created an atmosphere of growing fear in the neighborhood.
In several of the incidents, witnesses identified the suspects to police as young black men. Twin Lakes is about 50 percent white, with an African-American and Hispanic population of about 20 percent each, roughly similar to the surrounding city of Sanford, according to U.S. Census data.
One morning in July 2011, a black teenager walked up to Zimmerman's front porch and stole a bicycle, neighbors told Reuters. A police report was taken, though the bicycle was not recovered.
But it was the August incursion into the home of Olivia Bertalan that really troubled the neighborhood, particularly Zimmerman. Shellie was home most days, taking online courses towards certification as a registered nurse.
On August 3, Bertalan was at home with her infant son while her husband, Michael, was at work. She watched from a downstairs window, she said, as two black men repeatedly rang her doorbell and then entered through a sliding door at the back of the house. She ran upstairs, locked herself inside the boy's bedroom, and called a police dispatcher, whispering frantically.
"I said, 'What am I supposed to do? I hear them coming up the stairs!'" she told Reuters. Bertalan tried to coo her crying child into silence and armed herself with a pair of rusty scissors.
Police arrived just as the burglars - who had been trying to disconnect the couple's television - fled out a back door. Shellie Zimmerman saw a black male teen running through her backyard and reported it to police.
After police left Bertalan, George Zimmerman arrived at the front door in a shirt and tie, she said. He gave her his contact numbers on an index card and invited her to visit his wife if she ever felt unsafe. He returned later and gave her a stronger lock to bolster the sliding door that had been forced open.
"He was so mellow and calm, very helpful and very, very sweet," she said last week. "We didn't really know George at first, but after the break-in we talked to him on a daily basis. People were freaked out. It wasn't just George calling police ... we were calling police at least once a week."
In September, a group of neighbors including Zimmerman approached the homeowners association with their concerns, she said. Zimmerman was asked to head up a new neighborhood watch. He agreed.
"PLEASE CONTACT OUR CAPTAIN"
Police had advised Bertalan to get a dog. She and her husband decided to move out instead, and left two days before the shooting. Zimmerman took the advice.
"He'd already had a mutt that he walked around the neighborhood every night - man, he loved that dog - but after that home invasion he also got a Rottweiler," said Jorge Rodriguez, a friend and neighbor of the Zimmermans.
Around the same time, Zimmerman also gave Rodriguez and his wife, Audria, his contact information, so they could reach him day or night. Rodriguez showed the index card to Reuters. In neat cursive was a list of George and Shellie's home number and cell phones, as well as their emails.
Less than two weeks later, another Twin Lakes home was burglarized, police reports show. Two weeks after that, a home under construction was vandalized.
The Retreat at Twin Lakes e-newsletter for February 2012 noted: "The Sanford PD has announced an increased patrol within our neighborhood ... during peak crime hours.
"If you've been a victim of a crime in the community, after calling police, please contact our captain, George Zimmerman."
EMMANUEL BURGESS - SETTING THE STAGE
On February 2, 2012, Zimmerman placed a call to Sanford police after spotting a young black man he recognized peering into the windows of a neighbor's empty home, according to several friends and neighbors.
"I don't know what he's doing. I don't want to approach him, personally," Zimmerman said in the call, which was recorded. The dispatcher advised him that a patrol car was on the way. By the time police arrived, according to the dispatch report, the suspect had fled.
On February 6, the home of another Twin Lakes resident, Tatiana Demeacis, was burglarized. Two roofers working directly across the street said they saw two African-American men lingering in the yard at the time of the break-in. A new laptop and some gold jewelry were stolen. One of the roofers called police the next day after spotting one of the suspects among a group of male teenagers, three black and one white, on bicycles.
Police found Demeacis's laptop in the backpack of 18-year-old Emmanuel Burgess, police reports show, and charged him with dealing in stolen property. Burgess was the same man Zimmerman had spotted on February 2.
Burgess had committed a series of burglaries on the other side of town in 2008 and 2009, pleaded guilty to several, and spent all of 2010 incarcerated in a juvenile facility, his attorney said. He is now in jail on parole violations.
Three days after Burgess was arrested, Zimmerman's grandmother was hospitalized for an infection, and the following week his father was also admitted for a heart condition. Zimmerman spent a number of those nights on a hospital room couch.
Ten days after his father was hospitalized, Zimmerman noticed another young man in the neighborhood, acting in a way he found familiar, so he made another call to police.
"We've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy," Zimmerman said, as Trayvon Martin returned home from the store.
The last time Zimmerman had called police, to report Burgess, he followed protocol and waited for police to arrive. They were too late, and Burgess got away.
This time, Zimmerman was not so patient, and he disregarded police advice against pursuing Martin.
"These assholes," he muttered in an aside, "they always get away."
After the phone call ended, several minutes passed when the movements of Zimmerman and Martin remain a mystery.
Moments later, Martin lay dead with a bullet in his chest.
-
A gated community honestly should have hired a security officer or an off duty cop seeing as how they are collecting all of those HOA fees
-
cop or security guard, if they would have been white it still would have been handled the same way by the media and the activists.
-
A gated community honestly should have hired a security officer or an off duty cop seeing as how they are collecting all of those HOA fees
yeah, agreed.
No matter what the history of the place was, Trayvon was just a kid walking home from buying candy. Making a direct beeline for his house. He "looked like" people who had been robbing places, but he wasn't. He was on the phone chatting with his girl and walking to her house. He was a block away.
It's a shitty set of circumstances, but I think we all know ZImm probably just should have stayed in his truck.... as he told the police 911 dispatcher that he would do. He said he'd meet them at the mailbox. Instead, he took his gun and he followed a kid for 2 blocks and asked him 'what are you doing here'.
I dunno, if it's dark, and you're walking home, and after 2 blocks of some stranger with a gun following you - he suddenly approaches you - shit, i think everyone here would be ready to fight. ZImmerman may have let that gun bulge show... lol "keltec 9 mm" piece of shit.
-
agreed kel- tec, pos he shoulda had a sig 229 shooting 357 sig rounds, or a kimber
-
yeah, agreed.
No matter what the history of the place was, Trayvon was just a kid walking home from buying candy. Making a direct beeline for his house. He "looked like" people who had been robbing places, but he wasn't. He was on the phone chatting with his girl and walking to her house. He was a block away.
It's a shitty set of circumstances, but I think we all know ZImm probably just should have stayed in his truck.... as he told the police 911 dispatcher that he would do. He said he'd meet them at the mailbox. Instead, he took his gun and he followed a kid for 2 blocks and asked him 'what are you doing here'.
I dunno, if it's dark, and you're walking home, and after 2 blocks of some stranger with a gun following you - he suddenly approaches you - shit, i think everyone here would be ready to fight. ZImmerman may have let that gun bulge show... lol "keltec 9 mm" piece of shit.
Why do you lie? That's a serious question.
-
Why do you lie? That's a serious question.
which part do i have wrong?
"OK, do you just want to meet with them at the mailboxes then? Zimmerman: Yeah, that's fine. 911 dispatcher: Alright, George, I'll let them know "
-
which part do i have wrong?
::)
Answer the question.
-
::)
Answer the question.
I didn't know i was lying. it's how i feel. if i'm tailed by someone 2 blocks to my house and he gets to a distance where he can speak to me, shit is on already. honestly.
-
I can sympathize with 240's perspective here. If someone starts tailing me in my neighborhood for no reason and asks me what I'm doing there, I'm gonna get heated. I wouldn't attack the guy and slam his head into the curb--if that's what Treyvon did--but I'd be irritated.
-
I can sympathize with 240's perspective here. If someone starts tailing me in my neighborhood for no reason and asks me what I'm doing there, I'm gonna get heated. I wouldn't attack the guy and slam his head into the curb--if that's what Treyvon did--but I'd be irritated.
I'll give it to 240. He's clever enough to frame the argument to his advantage. Unfortunately from what we know z didn't confront t. It was the other way around.
-
I'll give it to 240. He's clever enough to frame the argument to his advantage. Unfortunately from what we know z didn't confront t. It was the other way around.
Aside from Zimm's own self-serving words...
what other witness claims they saw trayvon doing the attacking? Link please?
I thought the only witness testimonies was that they all looked out once the fight was already on the ground. Nobody saw it start. the only witnesses were Tm's GF on the phone, and zimm himself. Is that 'what we know'? Or is there another witness?
-
Aside from Zimm's own self-serving words...
what other witness claims they saw trayvon doing the attacking? Link please?
I thought the only witness testimonies was that they all looked out once the fight was already on the ground. Nobody saw it start. the only witnesses were Tm's GF on the phone, and zimm himself. Is that 'what we know'? Or is there another witness?
Pretty sure it came out that the GF was lieing.
And you lied when you said this -
Instead, he took his gun and he followed a kid for 2 blocks and asked him 'what are you doing here'.
And this -
Zimm probably just should have stayed in his truck.... as he told the police 911 dispatcher that he would do.
He never told the dispatcher he would stay in his truck, and he didnt ask him anything that were aware of.
People call you out for lieing because you frame a entire conversation around a couple small lies to make the story seem completely different than how it actually went down.
You lie so much on this subject Ive given up calling you out on them all, because its every fucking post with you, every post you lie about something to add intent or to make it seem more sinister than it was. Its pathetic, and signs of someone that is either a compulsive liar or someone that cant deal with being wrong..
-
Aside from Zimm's own self-serving words...
what other witness claims they saw trayvon doing the attacking? Link please?
I thought the only witness testimonies was that they all looked out once the fight was already on the ground. Nobody saw it start. the only witnesses were Tm's GF on the phone, and zimm himself. Is that 'what we know'? Or is there another witness?
So you're admitting the only testimony we have comes from z? If that's the case then the way you described the attack was fabricated in your head. Nice try.
-
So you're admitting the only testimony we have comes from z? If that's the case then the way you described the attack was fabricated in your head. Nice try.
I'm saying there is no evidence of who attacked who, to the best of my knowledge. if there is no GF testimony, it's just zimmerman's words.
Can we all agree the only evidence of who STARTED THE PHYSICAL FIGHT is zimmerman's words? yes or no?
-
I'm saying there is no evidence of who attacked who, to the best of my knowledge. if there is no GF testimony, it's just zimmerman's words.
Can we all agree the only evidence of who STARTED THE PHYSICAL FIGHT is zimmerman's words? yes or no?
So back to my original question. Why do you lie?
-
Pretty sure it came out that the GF was lieing.
He never told the dispatcher he would stay in his truck, and he didnt ask him anything that were aware of.
[/qutote]
I won't even argue the GF point. I didn't know it was disproven. LInk?
And his truck was parked at the stop sign at entrance of park right next to the mailboxes.
"OK, do you just want to meet with them at the mailboxes then? Zimmerman: Yeah, that's fine. 911 dispatcher: Alright, George, I'll let them know "
My point is that if the ONLY evidence of trayvon starting the fight is ZImm's words..... well, that ain't good for the defense. Cause he'd have to get on the stand, and shit is over once he does that.
-
I'm saying there is no evidence of who attacked who, to the best of my knowledge. if there is no GF testimony, it's just zimmerman's words.
Can we all agree the only evidence of who STARTED THE PHYSICAL FIGHT is zimmerman's words? yes or no?
Yes. But since the burden of proof is on the prosecutor to prove he's lying, it doesnt matter. Cause she admitted to the judge she cant.
Also - other parts of his story can be proven right, and there is NO evidence to other parts of his story being lies. Therefore nothing they can point to and say "See, he's lying about the rest of his story, its probably he's lying about who started the fight as well."
As I said - the burden of proof lies on the prosecution to prove that he's lying, not on Zimmerman to prove he's telling the truth.
-
Pretty sure it came out that the GF was lieing.
He never told the dispatcher he would stay in his truck, and he didnt ask him anything that were aware of.
I won't even argue the GF point. I didn't know it was disproven. LInk?
And his truck was parked at the stop sign at entrance of park right next to the mailboxes.
"OK, do you just want to meet with them at the mailboxes then? Zimmerman: Yeah, that's fine. 911 dispatcher: Alright, George, I'll let them know "
My point is that if the ONLY evidence of trayvon starting the fight is ZImm's words..... well, that ain't good for the defense. Cause he'd have to get on the stand, and shit is over once he does that.
Your point is still a lie - you said he agreed to stay in his truck, which he never said. Small but critical difference that makes it sound totally different, and makes your statement a lie. Just one of a thousand such examples.
As far as the evidence - there isnt any evidence of who started it other than Zimmermans words, but its a mute fucking point, because the prosecution has to prove hes lying.
They cant convict on a reasonable doubt that he may be lying - thats ass-backwards. They can only convict if they can prove he's lying. Which they cant.
They cant say - well he may be lying because itll cover his ass, cause that wont work.
And they CAN use Trayvon on top of him as evidence to support his words of being attacked. (Even though it doesnt prove who started it, they can argue that he was attacked and Trayvon pushed him on the ground, because usually the aggressor is the one that winds up on top).
-
Yes. But since the burden of proof is on the prosecutor to prove he's lying, it doesnt matter. Cause she admitted to the judge she cant.
Also - other parts of his story can be proven right, and there is NO evidence to other parts of his story being lies. Therefore nothing they can point to and say "See, he's lying about the rest of his story, its probably he's lying about who started the fight as well."
As I said - the burden of proof lies on the prosecution to prove that he's lying, not on Zimmerman to prove he's telling the truth.
okay, we are on the same page here.
The prosecutor can't prove what happened in those initial 5 seconds when TM met GZ and it got physical. And that's a common thing when you have two dudes fighting and nobody knows who started it. So that's why I said it's a coin flip to begin with. Then the jury will have to look at the factors before the fight occured.
Who was following who?
Who had a weapon?
Who lived on that street, who did not?
Were they both adults?
Did EITHER person have any reason to want to confront the other person?
Trayvon was unarmed, had a destination on that road, was a minor being followed by a person who mistook him for someone who stole a bike from him.
Zimm had an ax to grind, a gun in his pants, was the only adult here, and didn't live on that damn street. he was recorded following TM.
These factors, in my opinion, make that 50/50 jury coin flip look a lot different.
-
okay, we are on the same page here.
The prosecutor can't prove what happened in those initial 5 seconds when TM met GZ and it got physical. And that's a common thing when you have two dudes fighting and nobody knows who started it. So that's why I said it's a coin flip to begin with. Then the jury will have to look at the factors before the fight occured.
Who was following who?
Who had a weapon?
Who lived on that street, who did not?
Were they both adults?
Did EITHER person have any reason to want to confront the other person?
Trayvon was unarmed, had a destination on that road, was a minor being followed by a person who mistook him for someone who stole a bike from him.
Zimm had an ax to grind, a gun in his pants, was the only adult here, and didn't live on that damn street. he was recorded following TM.
These factors, in my opinion, make that 50/50 jury coin flip look a lot different.
You're doing it again. If the prosecution can't disprove what z said then the case won't go any father. Nothing you said after that initial statement matters.
-
You're doing it again. If the prosecution can't disprove what z said then the case won't go any father. Nothing you said after that initial statement matters.
I'm sure there are times in history when the prosecution can't disprove a guy's statement.
but if he shows a lack of credibility...
if there's a lot of evidence to the contrary leading up to the event...
if he changes his story afterwards...
he is still found guilty. i dunno, maybe i'm wrong. but i don't think this is a slam dunk for either side. he did charge armed into a situation against a minor he mistakenly thought was a burglar. if i'm a juror, i don't automatically believe him word. he also sounded fishy on the 911 call "he looks like he's on drugs or something".... to me, that isn't a credible statement. That's a "get here faster, police!" statement. boom, that lessens his credibility when he makes statement later about the shooting.
maybe i'm wrong. but to me, zimm ain't the most credible guy. drama queen exaggerator.
-
240 - just stop. Your lies, distortions, and deceit on this issue have been nothing less than embarrassing.
-
Then the jury will have to look at the factors before the fight occured.
Who was following who?
Who had a weapon?
Who lived on that street, who did not?
Were they both adults?
Did EITHER person have any reason to want to confront the other person?
In the end, everything will be focused upon the act of following.
-
In the end, everything will be focused upon the act of following.
think so? grownup following kid 2 blocks in the dark with a gun. all while calling him an asshole.
-
think so? grownup following kid 2 blocks in the dark with a gun. all while calling him an asshole.
::)
Fortunatley for Zimmerman none of those things are illegal. And fortunate for him he called the cops. Cause to any normal person, him calling the cops is showing that he DOESNT have intent to kill someone (which they have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt). Only you, 240, would see his phone call to the police about a suspicious person somehow meaning he had intent to kill ::)
Usually when someone calls the cops on a suspicious person, they arent intending to murder said person.
Good luck getting a court to convict a man on "Well he had a gun (even though he has a CWP and was simply driving home) and he followed him! (even though he told the 911 dispatcher he gave up and was heading back to his truck) That means he had intent to kill!"
And your comments on TM's age are equally ludicrous. How the hell was he supposed to know how old a 6'3" black man is when he's wearing a hoodie in the dark? Oh, and the epic gem about him describing whats in TM's hands, and what he's wearing (at the dispatchers request, no less) to somehow mean he was setting it up so he could kill the kid legally.
Seriously 240, do you EVER stop and think before you post shit? Do you actually hear yourself? Because its fucking sad.
-
::)
Fortunatley for Zimmerman none of those things are illegal. And fortunate for him he called the cops. Cause to any normal person, him calling the cops is showing that he DOESNT have intent to kill someone (which they have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt). Only you, 240, would see his phone call to the police about a suspicious person somehow meaning he had intent to kill ::)
I can play 911 calls of people who called the police and INFORMED THEM they were gonna go outside and start shooting. We've all heard them. Remember the old man with a shotgun who shot two burglars in the back, and walked?
I don't believe he went in saying I'm gonna kill this burglar. But I do think he went in with that Rambo attitude of "if he makes a move, I'm dropping him, cause I'm the law in this park!"
I dunno what else to say. He pursued a kid, carrying a gun, calling him an asshole burglar. The kid did nothing but walk home from the store. The shoot was probably technically legal but he'll probably go to jail because, well,, he was fudgy about the truth and he caused the whole shitstorm by playing detective badass. Sucks for everyone involved. He does NOT deserve 20 years, but I think he'll get them.
-
I can play 911 calls of people who called the police and INFORMED THEM they were gonna go outside and start shooting. We've all heard them. Remember the old man with a shotgun who shot two burglars in the back, and walked?
I don't believe he went in saying I'm gonna kill this burglar. But I do think he went in with that Rambo attitude of "if he makes a move, I'm dropping him, cause I'm the law in this park!"
I dunno what else to say. He pursued a kid, carrying a gun, calling him an asshole burglar. The kid did nothing but walk home from the store. The shoot was probably technically legal but he'll probably go to jail because, well,, he was fudgy about the truth and he caused the whole shitstorm by playing detective badass. Sucks for everyone involved. He does NOT deserve 20 years, but I think he'll get them.
You dont have anything else to say because your wrong.
You dont have anything else to say because your evidence is all speculation and has no evidence and would never hold up in a coutroom.
And fudgy about the truth? Everything that can be checked has been 100% the truth. Quit with your lies. Its bullshit. What "truth" was he fudgy about? Telling them he's just standing their looking around (in the rain), that he looks like hes on drugs? Or the truth about him describing him as having something in his hands and waistband? (Which was skittles and juice) Because in both cases, he told the fucking truth. He wasnt fudgy about shit. Where do you come up with this shit?
-
You dont have anything else to say because your wrong.
You dont have anything else to say because your evidence is all speculation and has no evidence and would never hold up in a coutroom.
i've said the shoot was legal. So I'm with zimm on that. I do think he's a complete dubmshit fckstick who should never be trusted with a butterknife again, because he is the epitome of what is wrong with permit holders.
that being said, i think the jury will wrongly convict him based upon his actions which led to the circumstances where a no-witness, dark street confrontation was inevitable. Then his weak ass half-lies "I think he's on drugs"... dude did everything he could to tell the jurors he will exaggerate shit to get attention.
-
i've said the shoot was legal. So I'm with zimm on that. I do think he's a complete dubmshit fckstick who should never be trusted with a butterknife again, because he is the epitome of what is wrong with permit holders.
that being said, i think the jury will wrongly convict him based upon his actions which led to the circumstances where a no-witness, dark street confrontation was inevitable. Then his weak ass half-lies "I think he's on drugs"... dude did everything he could to tell the jurors he will exaggerate shit to get attention.
I like how now youre saying he's going to be "wrongly" convicted. lulz
How is that a lie? Telling the dispatcher someone is just standing in the rain looking around, and saying he looks like he might be on drugs, is not a lie. Whats he supposed to do, stop the kid and drug test him? I mean wtf dude? He didnt exaggerate shit - the dispatcher asked him to describe him, and he did. Black male, hoodie, something in his hands and waistband (skittles and juice), and something on his shirt. Doesnt sound like a lie or an exaggeration to me, or anything with any sort of normal cognitive reasoning.
-
i've said for a month now that it was probably a legal shoot.
If I was a juror, I'd listen to "I think he's on drugs or something" and my bullshit detector would go off. That wouldn't happen for you? You'll take that to mean he honestly believed that? To me, it sounded like bullshit. Then again, I was the one calling bullshit on cain after 1 woman, and there were getbiggers who still said "I really believe he hasn't done anything inappropriate in 43 years" even after all the 4 am test messages came out ;)
So its' pointless to argue. I believe zimmerman is a man with poor credibility who showed poor judgment - who created a fcking street fight which he lost, at which point he used the law "I feared for my life" and shot someone. It sucks that people can initiate situations then bail themselves out with a gun. It really does.
but if you don't think he's a sneaky little truth-stretching snake, that's cool. I do.
-
i've said for a month now that it was probably a legal shoot.
If I was a juror, I'd listen to "I think he's on drugs or something" and my bullshit detector would go off. That wouldn't happen for you? You'll take that to mean he honestly believed that? To me, it sounded like bullshit. Then again, I was the one calling bullshit on cain after 1 woman, and there were getbiggers who still said "I really believe he hasn't done anything inappropriate in 43 years" even after all the 4 am test messages came out ;)
So its' pointless to argue. I believe zimmerman is a man with poor credibility who showed poor judgment - who created a fcking street fight which he lost, at which point he used the law "I feared for my life" and shot someone. It sucks that people can initiate situations then bail themselves out with a gun. It really does.
but if you don't think he's a sneaky little truth-stretching snake, that's cool. I do.
Everything isnt a conspicacy theory 240, some things happen just the way they happen you know. Someone calling the Police because he see's some dude standing and staring around in the rain may raise some flags in his head. You simply go after him assuming he was out to be bad - you cant take off you blinders and actually LOOK at what happened. You have the pre-concieved notion of who Zimmerman was and what he intended to do and you grasp on any possible angle to try and prove yourself right. You chose your side as soon as MSNBC told you so - and youve spent the last 2 weeks seizing upon any possible little thing to try and justify it.
You simply cant accept that MAYBE, just MAYBE things went down as he said they did, that this isnt some big lie in order for Zimmerman to cap some kid and get away with it -
That he actually thought the kid was possibly under the influence, that he may have been up to no good, and that he just wanted to keep an eye on him until the cops arrived, but gave up after the kid took off.
And your only evidence?
"Well I think he's lying cause he said some dude looked like he was on drugs and he followed him with a gun, that means he was lying to the cops to me!" No evidence, no proof of lies, no way to justify any of what you say. As a matter of fact, not only can you NOT prove he was lying about anything at all, but there are plenty of people that can prove he's telling the truth about MOST of what happened. Making your claim that much more absurd.
Nope, no evidence. Just "well my BS meter went of cause I think he was exaggerating to get the cops their faster (which I noticed you changed from lying in order to justify shooting him), and my BS meter going off is enough to convict this man of MURDER with no actual evidence that anything he said was a lie"
-
Bottom line - and if i'm wrong, please provide evidence....
There is no evidence either man actually started the fight - only zimmerman's word.
Withnesses saw him losing a fight, but NOBODY saw the initial attack, who attacked who. CORRECT?
-
Witness testimony + the smashed head pic only show that zimmerman can't fight. Period. He was losing a fight to a 17 year old.
But who started the fight? Did zimmerman grab trayvon and try to pin him down until the police arrived? Did Trayvon swing on zimm first? We have equal evidence of both scenarios - NONE.
-
Everything isnt a conspicacy theory 240, some things happen just the way they happen you know. Someone calling the Police because he see's some dude standing and staring around in the rain may raise some flags in his head. You simply go after him assuming he was out to be bad - you cant take off you blinders and actually LOOK at what happened. You have the pre-concieved notion of who Zimmerman was and what he intended to do and you grasp on any possible angle to try and prove yourself right. You chose your side as soon as MSNBC told you so - and youve spent the last 2 weeks seizing upon any possible little thing to try and justify it.
You simply cant accept that MAYBE, just MAYBE things went down as he said they did, that this isnt some big lie in order for Zimmerman to cap some kid and get away with it -
That he actually thought the kid was possibly under the influence, that he may have been up to no good, and that he just wanted to keep an eye on him until the cops arrived, but gave up after the kid took off.
And your only evidence?
"Well I think he's lying cause he said some dude looked like he was on drugs and he followed him with a gun, that means he was lying to the cops to me!" No evidence, no proof of lies, no way to justify any of what you say. As a matter of fact, not only can you NOT prove he was lying about anything at all, but there are plenty of people that can prove he's telling the truth about MOST of what happened. Making your claim that much more absurd.
Nope, no evidence. Just "well my BS meter went of cause I think he was exaggerating to get the cops their faster (which I noticed you changed from lying in order to justify shooting him), and my BS meter going off is enough to convict this man of MURDER with no actual evidence that anything he said was a lie"
There is also a very high probability that Trayvon began acting noticeably strange when he noticed he was bring watched. That is a very normal reaction, especially for a young man of his age. Zimmerman could easily read that as him "possibly" being on drugs...as he stated in the conversation when he said "I think"
I just don't see the criticism of zimmermans statement as holding very much water. It's actually pretty irrelevant when you put what was transpiring in the proper context.
-
Bottom line - and if i'm wrong, please provide evidence....
There is no evidence either man actually started the fight - only zimmerman's word.
Withnesses saw him losing a fight, but NOBODY saw the initial attack, who attacked who. CORRECT?
You werent arguing who started the fight you stupid fuck, you were arguing that he was lying cause your "BS meter" went off based on his observations in response to the dispatchers questions.
For fucks sake, he has eyewitness' and wounds backing up most of his story, what do you have to prove he was lying? Hmm? You keep asking me for evidence, but you have ZERO to support your claim he was fudging the truth.
Your whole argument is that he was lying about an OBSERVATION he made! An OBSERVATION! Youre saying his whole story is called into question because of an OBSERVATION HE MADE at the behest of the dispatcher!
Evidence. Show it. Cause even though no one can prove he started the fight, he sure as hell can prove a helluva lot more of his story than you can disprove it. And thats the whole fucking point.
The burden of proof is on YOU to prove that he's lying, just as its on the prosecution. Its not on him to prove he's telling the truth. You have NOTHING besides your BS'o'meter.
He has people to back up parts of his story. He has evidence to back up parts of his story. And you have NOTHING to prove ANY part of it wrong.
-
Witness testimony + the smashed head pic only show that zimmerman can't fight. Period. He was losing a fight to a 17 year old.
But who started the fight? Did zimmerman grab trayvon and try to pin him down until the police arrived? Did Trayvon swing on zimm first? We have equal evidence of both scenarios - NONE.
240, if you get blindsided like this very well could have it doesn't mean you can't fight. There is some little 130 pound guy who could walk up behind you and drop you like a sack of potatoes while you are rolling up your instrumental gear at a nightclub and you couldn't do shit about it. Doesn't mean you can't fight, just means you got assaulted.
-
Bottom line - and if i'm wrong, please provide evidence....
There is no evidence either man actually started the fight - only zimmerman's word.
Withnesses saw him losing a fight, but NOBODY saw the initial attack, who attacked who.
Thing is dude, we don't have to provide evidence zimmerman is right, YOU have to provide evidence zimmerman was wrong.
-
240, if you get blindsided like this very well could have it doesn't mean you can't fight. There is some little 130 pound guy who could walk up behind you and drop you like a sack of potatoes while you are rolling up your instrumental gear at a nightclub and you couldn't do shit about it. Doesn't mean you can't fight, just means you got assaulted.
LOL, a 6'3" 200+ lb 17 year old. Lol. But no, in lala land, the aggressor is the guy on his back crying for help right after the fight begins.
-
put them together. anytime there's a fight and you have zero witnesses, you have to look at the CIRCUMSTANCES and EVIDENCE.
No witness saw trayvon nor zimm start the fight.
The only physical and eyewitness evidence is "Zimm was losing the fight".
So you look at circumstances. If X pursued Y, and I"m a juror, I'd say there's a greater chance X was the aggressor.
if X lived on other side of park, and Y lived here on this street, I'd wonder what the hell X is doing on this street and assign greater probability to X being aggressor.
if X was packing a 9mm and Y was unarmed, I'd guess X felt way more cocky and aggressive and confident of a win.
What was trayvon doing to 'act like' the aggressor, besides winning the fucking fight once they were on the ground?
he was walking home, unarmed, with the destination on that street. If you think the signs point to zimm being an innocent bystander, I dunno what to tell you. I think jurors will disagree.
again, please prove me wrong - NO EYEWITNESSES SAW WHO STARTED THE FIGHT.
-
240, if you get blindsided like this very well could have it doesn't mean you can't fight. There is some little 130 pound guy who could walk up behind you and drop you like a sack of potatoes while you are rolling up your instrumental gear at a nightclub and you couldn't do shit about it. Doesn't mean you can't fight, just means you got assaulted.
But if I was chasing the 130 pound dude for blocks... i'm carrying a gun... i'm calling him an asshole...
and i end up shooting him, i'm feelin like a damn fool for putting myself into that spot.
-
put them together. anytime there's a fight and you have zero witnesses, you have to look at the CIRCUMSTANCES and EVIDENCE.
No witness saw trayvon nor zimm start the fight.
The only physical and eyewitness evidence is "Zimm was losing the fight".
So you look at circumstances. If X pursued Y, and I"m a juror, I'd say there's a greater chance X was the aggressor.
if X lived on other side of park, and Y lived here on this street, I'd wonder what the hell X is doing on this street and assign greater probability to X being aggressor.
if X was packing a 9mm and Y was unarmed, I'd guess X felt way more cocky and aggressive and confident of a win.
What was trayvon doing to 'act like' the aggressor, besides winning the fucking fight once they were on the ground?
he was walking home, unarmed, with the destination on that street. If you think the signs point to zimm being an innocent bystander, I dunno what to tell you. I think jurors will disagree.
again, please prove me wrong - NO EYEWITNESSES SAW WHO STARTED THE FIGHT.
Again, the burden of proof is on people proving zimmerman wrong. You nor anyone else seems to be able to do that so case closed.
-
Thing is dude, we don't have to provide evidence zimmerman is right, YOU have to provide evidence zimmerman was wrong.
the 911 call did that :)
He called trayvon a fcking asshole, followed him 2 blocks with a gun. yes, zimm was 2 blocks from his truck when the shooting happened.
TO me, that is evidence that zimm was indeed the aggressor in the fight. Or, he's playing that little cocklust game of "i'm gonna follow you for 2 blocks in the dark with a gun then get in your face and say "where do you live".
Dude, zimm was running KEY CHECKS on people he met in the street. fucking key checks - did you see that 911 transcript, 47 pages? Dude was a cock, plaing and simple. caused the whole mess and was certainly the aggressor.
-
Again, the burden of proof is on people proving zimmerman wrong. You nor anyone else seems to be able to do that so case closed.
if that's case closed, why did the republican prosecutor indict him?
and please dont say "to avoid riots", as that woudl be a CT and we know there weren't riots for the 5 or 6 weeks he wasn't arrested.
-
But if I was chasing the 130 pound dude for blocks... i'm carrying a gun... i'm calling him an asshole...
and i end up shooting him, i'm feelin like a damn fool for putting myself into that spot.
There's really no point in arguing with them. They're the super tough internet racists. Somehow, the narrative will always be brought around to where it's the black guy's fault.
If the races were reversed, they would be arguing the exact opposite, such as black guys shouldn't go around with a gun trying to act like a gangster, etc., etc.
-
imagine if trayvon shot zimmerman on zimm's street.
with no witnesses.
after calling zimm an asshole burglar on tape.
after following zimm for two blocks.
after trayvon felony assaulted a cop and had a domestic violence charge...
Yeah, I bet getbig would be saying "trayvon innocent, he said so, winning!"
-
But if I was chasing the 130 pound dude for blocks... i'm carrying a gun... i'm calling him an asshole...
and i end up shooting him, i'm feelin like a damn fool for putting myself into that spot.
I'm sure at this point he does feel somewhat like a fool. His life as he knew it is over. I'll agree with this statement.
-
(CNN) -- The lawyer for the neighborhood watch leader who fatally shot unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, said Thursday that his client has received about $200,000 from supporters. Orlando lawyer Mark O'Mara told CNN's "AC360" that George Zimmerman told him Wednesday of the donations as they were trying to shut down his Internet presence to avoid concerns about possible impersonators.
"He asked me what to do with his PayPal accounts and I asked him what he was talking about," O'Mara told Anderson Cooper. "And he said those were the accounts that had the money from the website he had. And there was about 200, $204,000 that had come in to date."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
-
put them together. anytime there's a fight and you have zero witnesses, you have to look at the CIRCUMSTANCES and EVIDENCE.
No witness saw trayvon nor zimm start the fight.
The only physical and eyewitness evidence is "Zimm was losing the fight".
So you look at circumstances. If X pursued Y, and I"m a juror, I'd say there's a greater chance X was the aggressor. - (Except X called the cops and was trying to keep tabs on him until they arrived, then told 911 HE GAVE UP and was headed back to his truck. Wheres your evidence that wasnt EXACTLY what he did?)
if X lived on other side of park, and Y lived here on this street, I'd wonder what the hell X is doing on this street and assign greater probability to X being aggressor. - (Dude was neighborhood watch, not like he was a stranger in the neighborhood you fucking idiot, why do you think he called TM in? Cause he was in some random neighborhood and saw a black dude so he needed to save a completely different neighborhood? Moron)
if X was packing a 9mm and Y was unarmed, I'd guess X felt way more cocky and aggressive and confident of a win. - (supposition, no way to prove HOW he was feeling, wheres your proof thats how he was feeling?)
What was trayvon doing to 'act like' the aggressor, besides winning the fucking fight once they were on the ground? - (Again, supposition, no way to prove Trayvon wasnt the aggressor, no way for you to prove that he wasnt attacked, no way to disprove that he was on the ground because Trayvon jumped him. Waiting for your evidence to show he WASNT attacked. Cause thats what the court is going to want.)
he was walking home, unarmed, with the destination on that street. (He was. And then, according to the guy that has to be proven wrong, he turned around and confronted Zimmerman and attacked him. Prove this wrong. Ill wait.) If you think the signs point to zimm being an innocent bystander, I dunno what to tell you. I think jurors will disagree.
again, please prove me wrong - NO EYEWITNESSES SAW WHO STARTED THE FIGHT. - (Its not on us to prove you wrong you fucking dunce, its on you to prove Zimmerman wrong. Why do you keep ignoring that and acting like your suppositions based on absolutley no evidence is somehow the defenses job to prove wrong. I could claim that because you talked about being aggressive with people in the past that you are always aggressive and always ready to attack people in your neighborhood, but it doesnt make it true, does it? Its the same as your claims, we both have the same amount of evidence. Youre argument is literally "This man clearly felt this way because of these 3 things I cherry picked out, and there is no other possibilities. It makes you sound like a fucking idiot.)
Except that X told 911 he had given up and was heading back to his truck, and X has parts of his story that CAN be proven true, and you have ZERO evidence to prove him false.
And since X's story has to be proven FALSE to be guilty, and you cant prove ANYTHING, let alone provide evidence of anything you claim (because its all supposition, you have nothing to back any of it up)
So, there we go. He has evidence supporting parts of his story, and you have ZERO evidence to disprove his story. Good job.
Or, heres another one, since you keep saying that he pursued him, provide me with evidence that he didnt turn around and head back to his truck, since thats what he told 911 he was doing. Ill wait. Oh, you cant? Good job.
Oh, heres the kicker, waiting for you to provide evidence that he WASNT attacked by Zimmerman. Like I said above, your obviously taking the side of the prosecution, so wheres the evidence he's lying? Wheres your evidence that he attacked Travyon? Oh, wait, you cant prove him wrong? Oh, really? Good job. Innocent until proven guilty, bitch.
Zimmerman can prove parts of his story. He can prove he was in a scuffle. He can PROVE his head was being smashed into the concrete. He can PROVE he had reasonable fear of his life to use deadly force. He can PROVE that Travyon was on top of him. He can PROVE most of his 911 call. He can PROVE where he parked his truck. He can PROVE his description of Trayvon was accurate.
Waiting for ANYTHING that you can disprove of his story. No more "Well I think he was thinking this and thats why he's lying". I want actual PROOF things didnt go down exactly as he said they did, cause thats what the judge and jury is going to want. The court cannot convict ANYONE because the prosecution "thinks" he's lying.
-
Waiting for ANYTHING that you can disprove of his story. No more "Well I think he was thinking this and thats why he's lying". I want actual PROOF things didnt go down exactly as he said they did.
this doesn't work. why? cause zimm could have said aliens did it. or a dozen penguins came out of the sewer and shot trayon. I can't prove things didn't go down exactly as he would claim - but i'd damn sure doubt his words.
Juries use a whole lot of supposition to convict the shit out of people.
-
this doesn't work. why? cause zimm could have said aliens did it. or a dozen penguins came out of the sewer and shot trayon. I can't prove things didn't go down exactly as he would claim - but i'd damn sure doubt his words.
Juries use a whole lot of supposition to convict the shit out of people.
Translation - I cant so Im gonna "nuh uh it doesn work like that!"
It does work you dumbass, cause that how the courts work (Innocent until proven guilty! The prosecution has to prove him wrong! How do you not understand that?!). But I wouldnt expect you to understand that, considering in a different post you were insinuating that the Jury is somehow going to give this guy the maximum sentence when they have nothing to do with sentencing.
Here is the list of things Zimmerman CAN prove again.
Zimmerman can prove parts of his story. He can PROVE he was in a scuffle. He can PROVE his head was being smashed into the concrete. He can PROVE he had reasonable fear of his life to use deadly force. He can PROVE that Travyon was on top of him. He can PROVE most of his 911 call. He can PROVE where he parked his truck. He can PROVE his description of Trayvon was accurate.
(BTW, that bolded part is the kicker, they cant prove he is lying but he can prove he feared for his life)
Here is the list of Zimmermans story you can DISPROVE -
.
.
.
.
.
Oh yeah, you cant disprove shit. Thats why, when asked for actual evidence, your answer was "well that doesnt work cause he could have said anything". Good job failing.
Waiting for evidence that juries "convict people on supposition" (Really? You really just said that?)
Dude, I cant take you seriously anymore. You have to be trolling, no one can be this stupid.
-
It will come to the single question of whether the act of following was done aggressively.
-
shoot was legal by the law.
he'll be convicted based upon emotion & common sense.
-
It will come to the single question of whether the act of following was done through aggression.
Yeah, theyre going to try and use that angle, but with no way of actually proving it was done in an aggressive way, (and not simply because he was trying to keep on eye on him until the cops arrived) its not going to go very far IMHO. Plus they have no evidence to back that claim up.
-I came up with these in 2 seconds.
Calling him an asshole? (Was a generalization of the people that had been burglarizing his neighborhood, and he was upset that the police never arrived fast enough to apprehend them. No real evidence of intent to harm)
Having a gun? (Zimmerman was on his way back from town, and has a CWP that an officer advised him to get. No evidence of intent to hurt someone. He didnt leave his house and go straight to the street with his gun)
Following him? (Trayvon stared weirdly for a bit, prompting the "Looks like he's on drugs", then took off. Zimmerman wondering why he suddenly took off wanted to keep an eye on him. No evidence of intent to harm there)
Description? (911 Dispatcher asked for a description, which he gave, in detail, down to something in his hands and belt, Skittles and juice. No evidence of intent to harm there)
Expect the defense to have 100x better explanations than mine. Its too easy to come up with other possible intentions for every questionable part of his 911 call. Its next to impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did, in fact, say those things with the intent of causing Trayvon bodily harm.
Without evidence to point to his story being BS, and without evidence to prove that he was out with intent to kill, there really isnt anything that cant be explained easily in context. The prosecutor is fucked and she knows it, otherwise;
A.His bail would have been sky effin high in a high profile murder case.
And
B.Bail probably would have been denied. Except the prosecutor admitted she cant prove him wrong.
-
shoot was legal by the law.
he'll be Ive convicted him based upon emotion & common sense and im trying to justify to myself that im not actually a sheep and a moron with no clue as to how the justice system works.
-
Yeah, theyre going to try and use that angle, but with no way of actually proving it was done in an aggressive way, (and not simply because he was trying to keep on eye on him until the cops arrived) its not going to go very far IMHO. Plus they have no evidence to back that claim up.
How can it be argued that the pursuit WASNT in agression? He's swearing. He's calling the kid an asshole, accusing him of being a burglar. He covers 2 blocks in what, a period of 60 seconds? That was the distance of 'lost' time between the hangup and the time the 911 calls lasted. Zimm was probably winded by the time he caught up.
If calling names and accusing of felonies isn't aggression - what is?
-
Before I bow out of this subject, as I really cant stand anymore of 240's complete ignorance of the justice system,
Ill leave you with 1 interesting fact about the Justice System, 240.
There was a helluva lot more evidence that OJ killed his wife, than there is of Zimmerman lying about his story.
And that BLACK MURDER SUSPECT (this is for anyone that is trying to play the race card), was AQUITTED because the PROSECUTION COULD NOT PROVE that the glove used in the murder fit him.
They COULD NOT prove that he was lying about the glove. And he walked. With a mountain of "supposition", and ACTUAL EVIDENCE.
And your sitting here with a straight face telling me that this guy is going to get "the book thrown at him by the jury" (Oh brother), with ZERO evidence that he's lying, and ZERO evidence that he had hostile intent.
Youre going to tell me with a straight face, that the Prosecutor didnt know what she was talking about when she told the judge she couldnt disprove his story at the bail hearig?
That Dershowitz didnt know what he was talking about when he said not only should this case be thrown out, but that the PROSECUTOR should be brought up on charges for filing an affidavit that didnt even have enough prosecuting evidence to be credible?
And that he didnt know what he was talking about when he said that she either left out important defense information because if she hadnt, the judge would have thrown the affidavit out in laughter?
OJ walked because they couldnt prove his hand fit a glove. With a mountain of evidence you dont have. And much more supposition than "Well he called him an asshole and had a gun, and he followed him!"
OJ's wife was with another man. And they didnt convict him. Because they couldnt prove he was lying.
Food for thought.
-
How can it be argued that the pursuit WASNT in agression? He's swearing. He's calling the kid an asshole, accusing him of being a burglar. He covers 2 blocks in what, a period of 60 seconds? That was the distance of 'lost' time between the hangup and the time the 911 calls lasted. Zimm was probably winded by the time he caught up.
If calling names and accusing of felonies isn't aggression - what is?
Oh for gods sake.
I already did this in that post you idiot.
Its not aggression - its the INTENT TO COMMIT BODILY HARM. Thats what they have to prove.
Besides - it may not have been aggressive because he could have been trying to keep the kid in sight until the cops arrived.
BOOM, reasonable doubt, Defense rests, prove us wrong Prosecutors.
Insert 240 as Prosecutor -
Well,... but,... but.... he had a gun! And he called some faceless dude an asshole! It doesnt matter he has a CWP and was driving home from somewhere else! Clearly he had the intent to commit bodily harm to this kid! Cause he had a gun! It doesnt matter that the reason for having the gun on his person is completely unrelated to this event! Convict him guys, cause he had a gun on him when he chose to follow somebody that he called the cops on, when the kid took off as he was trying to tell the dispatcher where he was!
Judge-
Well, can you prove any of what he was saying false? Is there any reason to believe that he is lying about the rest of his story?
240-
Well Your honor, I cant actually disprove anything he said, but I really really feel he was lying because he called the kid an asshole and followed him!
Judge -
But you cant prove it.
240 -
Well your honor, clearly he wanted to kill the kid cause he called him an asshole! and he had a gun! And he followed him!
Judge -
240, this is supposition. Do you have ANY proof as to your claims of this mans intentions? Do you have ANY evidence WHATSOEVER that just because he had a gun on his person at the time, and he chose to follow the kid when the kid decided to take off, that he wanted to kill him?
240 -
Well... uh..... You see, he had a gun and he called him an asshole....
Judge -
Case dismissed.
Yeah, real compelling evidence ya got there.
-
LOL! I'm laughing. you make great points. zimm didn't murder him nor intend to shoot him. it happened because his ambitious ass pursued an aggressive kid for 2 blocks.
-
I know OJ did it. I know Casey Anthony did it. I know they walked.
I also know juries punish people when they feel the law doesn't punish a person who caused a death.
I predict this will happen here. It's not right, not legal, but I think it'll happen.
-
As the argument would go in such a case, aggression is escalation. This would cause at least part of the responsibility for damage to be placed with anyone who acted as an aggressor.
This is why it will ride on a single question.
-
Aside from Zimm's own self-serving words...
what other witness claims they saw trayvon doing the attacking? Link please?
I thought the only witness testimonies was that they all looked out once the fight was already on the ground. Nobody saw it start. the only witnesses were Tm's GF on the phone, and zimm himself. Is that 'what we know'? Or is there another witness?
So if there were no witnesses to say who started the attack, how can you make such statements as "He was just a kid going straight home buying candy"
It's absurd to make such ridiculous statements when they directly conflict with Zimmermans account. You have no evidence to base this on other than "that's just how I feel". Which doesn't mean jack shit in the court of law. I feel you are a racist homophobe. I have no direct evidence of this other than that's just how I feel, therefore it's now a fact.
-
Oh good... I was thinking we needed another thread on this crap.
-
Oh good... I was thinking we needed another thread on this crap.
They should have the argument wrapped up in a couple of hours.
-
So if there were no witnesses to say who started the attack, how can you make such statements as "He was just a kid going straight home buying candy"
It's absurd to make such ridiculous statements when they directly conflict with Zimmermans account. You have no evidence to base this on other than "that's just how I feel". Which doesn't mean jack shit in the court of law. I feel you are a racist homophobe. I have no direct evidence of this other than that's just how I feel, therefore it's now a fact.
Both men entered the park at about the same time. They were headed to destinations on diff sides of the park.
Except...
Zimm swung a hard left and went 2 more blocks away from his home to follow trayvon.
Trayvon was making a direct beeline for his GF's dad's house. she was on the phone expecting him.
Trayvon was almost there. Zimm was nowhere near his house.
Look at the X. Remember that zimm lived clear on the other side of the park. Look at the path trayvon took.
-
Both men entered the park at about the same time. They were headed to destinations on diff sides of the park.
Except...
Zimm swung a hard left and went 2 more blocks away from his home to follow trayvon.
Trayvon was making a direct beeline for his GF's dad's house. she was on the phone expecting him.
Trayvon was almost there. Zimm was nowhere near his house.
Look at the X. Remember that zimm lived clear on the other side of the park. Look at the path trayvon took.
Oh good lord.
Notice how it says "Trayvons "Assumed" path? Zimmermans "assumed" path?
That means they DONT FUCKING KNOW and cant prove it.
Good job bringing in another worthless argument with no evidence.
-
they know he didn't turn right and go toward zimm's house.
they know zimm didn't turn right and go home.
the shit went down almost to trayvon's destination. zimm had no business there - but hey those fcking asshole burglars needed dealt with.
-
they know he didn't turn right and go toward zimm's house.
they know zimm didn't turn right and go home.
the shit went down almost to trayvon's destination. zimm had no business there - but hey those fcking asshole burglars needed dealt with.
Yup, glad you have the evidence to prove what your saying.
Glad you have evidence that Zimmerman had no business being in the fucking neighborhood he was on the watch for, you fucking dunce.
Glad you have the evidence to prove Zimmerman wrong.
Brutal lack of cognitive skills.
-
hey, the same neighborhood watch this guy was in charge of had a nice "you cannot carry a firearm" policy.
SO any umbrella of authority he claims just went out the window.
He was a prick drunk (documented) who assaulted multiple people (documented) who couldn't fight (documented) and he decided to carry a gun (documented) and interfere with the law-abiding affairs of others who lived on the other side of the park (documented). Good luck explaining it to the jury.
-
Yup, glad you have the evidence to prove what your saying.
Glad you have evidence that Zimmerman had no business being in the fucking neighborhood he was on the watch for, you fucking dunce.
Glad you have the evidence to prove Zimmerman wrong.
Brutal lack of cognitive skills.
180 doesnt even realize how absurd he has come across these past few years.
-
180 doesnt even realize how absurd he has come across these past few years.
zimm was carrying a weapon, which directly violated the neighborhood association rules.
additionally, he has no legal authority. To touch or confront anyone. He was running 'key checks' months ago. no authority to do so.
-
hey, the same neighborhood watch this guy was in charge of had a nice "you cannot carry a firearm" policy.
SO any umbrella of authority he claims just went out the window.
He was a prick drunk (documented) who assaulted multiple people (documented) who couldn't fight (documented) and he decided to carry a gun (documented) and interfere with the law-abiding affairs of others who lived on the other side of the park (documented). Good luck explaining it to the jury.
Wait... your saying he had no business being in the neighborhood he lived in (You know, cause he was on the neighborhood watch there), and then go on to say he had no business carrying a gun, even though he has a CWP and was on the way home and not "actively" on watch?
You make no fucking sense. You have no proof he touched or confronted anyone. You cant back up any of your shit.
You keep lying to try and make your bullshit seem plausible, but yet every time you ask, you cannot seem to come up with ANYTHING to actually support, well, anything.
-
Wait... your saying he had no business being in the neighborhood he lived in (You know, cause he was on the neighborhood watch there), and then go on to say he had no business carrying a gun, even though he has a CWP and was on the way home and not "actively" on watch?
You make no fucking sense. You have no proof he touched or confronted anyone. You cant back up any of your shit.
You keep lying to try and make your bullshit seem plausible, but yet every time you ask, you cannot seem to come up with ANYTHING to actually support, well, anything.
Why are you wasting so much time trying to rationalize a subject with 180?
-
he had no biz claiming any authority of 'neighborhood watch captain' if his carrying a gun violated one of their BIG rules.
If he was just some random cock out for a walk, cool. But he was claiming a position of authority, while undermining that authority by carrying a gun while doing so.
There's a good reason you aren't aupposed to pack a piece while running thru the yards following unknown people.
-
hey, the same neighborhood watch this guy was in charge of had a nice "you cannot carry a firearm" policy.
SO any umbrella of authority he claims just went out the window.
He was a prick drunk (documented) who assaulted multiple people (documented) who couldn't fight (documented) and he decided to carry a gun (documented) and interfere with the law-abiding affairs of others who lived on the other side of the park (documented). Good luck explaining it to the jury.
How many altercations? What was the circumstances? What "multiplte people" (Cause I only know of one, which was wrapped up with the same altercation of the alcohol charge. And where did the "couldnt fight" come from?
He decided to carry a gun at the Police's suggestion, they told he pepper spray wouldnt work on big dogs so to get a gun.
Good luck proving he "interfered" with the affairs of a law abiding citizen bro, when you cant even prove he didnt do what he said.
He's not there to apologize for his previous life you fucking dunce. The prosecution is there to prove his story wrong.
-
he had no biz claiming any authority of 'neighborhood watch captain' if his carrying a gun violated one of their BIG rules.
If he was just some random cock out for a walk, cool. But he was claiming a position of authority, while undermining that authority by carrying a gun while doing so.
There's a good reason you aren't aupposed to pack a piece while running thru the yards following unknown people.
STFU - he had a CCW and you have no evidence he initiated the physical confrontation. your kneepadding traveyon is as bad as your obama dick sucking.
I am really ashamed of myself for having once thought you to be a credible person.
-
he had no biz claiming any authority of 'neighborhood watch captain' if his carrying a gun violated one of their BIG rules.
If he was just some random cock out for a walk, cool. But he was claiming a position of authority, while undermining that authority by carrying a gun while doing so.
There's a good reason you aren't aupposed to pack a piece while running thru the yards following unknown people.
What are you talking about?
He was in his own neighborhood (as evidenced by him being on the watch, though not actively on duty) and he called in a suspicious character.
How in the fuck are you even arguing this? You tried to say he had no business being IN HIS OWN NEIGHBORHOOD. Undermining his authority? He wasnt on watch! He has a CWP! Seriously, you are off in lala land with this one.
He had every right to call in a suspicious character in his own neighborhood, and his having his weapon and a CWP has NOTHING to do with it. Its not like he got his gun and left his house for watch you fucking dunce.
333 - Im doing it again, I know, he just drives me batshit insane with his fucking nonsense drivel.
-
he was charged with felony assault on LEO. pled down for alcohol counseling.
He was charged domestic violence.
He has a track record of violence - on police and women, quite sadly.
and he wasn't chasing a dog on that sunday night in the dark. He didn't leave his gun in the vehicle to respect the law. No, he knew going in that it might be a gun fight. and you NEVER walk into a situation where you think you might have to use your gun. You just dont.
He said the guy was on drugs, he said he saw him reach into waistband and now had something in his hand. Most of us would say "um, no way I'm gonna get into a gunfight... I'm letting the trained police handle this!"
Not zimm.
-
he was charged with felony assault on LEO. pled down for alcohol counseling.
He was charged domestic violence.
He has a track record of violence - on police and women, quite sadly.
and he wasn't chasing a dog on that sunday night in the dark. He didn't leave his gun in the vehicle to respect the law. No, he knew going in that it might be a gun fight. and you NEVER walk into a situation where you think you might have to use your gun. You just dont.
He said the guy was on drugs, he said he saw him reach into waistband and now had something in his hand. Most of us would say "um, no way I'm gonna get into a gunfight... I'm letting the trained police handle this!"
Not zimm.
All of your bogus crap is predicated on Zimm initiating the physical confrontation which you have ZERO evidence of.
-
he was charged with felony assault on LEO. pled down for alcohol counseling.
He was charged domestic violence.
He has a track record of violence - on police and women, quite sadly.
and he wasn't chasing a dog on that sunday night in the dark. He didn't leave his gun in the vehicle to respect the law. No, he knew going in that it might be a gun fight. and you NEVER walk into a situation where you think you might have to use your gun. You just dont.
He said the guy was on drugs, he said he saw him reach into waistband and now had something in his hand. Most of us would say "um, no way I'm gonna get into a gunfight... I'm letting the trained police handle this!"
Not zimm.
For fucks sake dude, an undercover cop tried to tackle his friend, and him not knowing any better went after the plainclothes.
Get your shit straight you fuckwit.
You still have ZERO evidence of anything that you claim.
You cant prove how he felt.
You cant prove his intentions.
You cant even prove any of his version wrong, how the fuck are you going to twist something from years ago to justify convicting a man of murder?
Jesus christ your daft.
-
i'm sure all you guys on here taking zimmerman on his word would be whistling a different tune if it was your son shot coming home from the store with a bag of deadly skittles ::)
-
i'm sure all you guys on here taking zimmerman on his word would be whistling a different tune if it was your son shot coming home from the store with a bag of deadly skittles ::)
If i had a son - at 17 y/o hopefully he would not be thugging up like tray w gold teeth, pants around ass, hoodie, gangsta, etc.
Again - portray yourself like a thug, and people take notice and act accordingly, especially when there were 8 recent burgalries by black thugs in that hood recently.
-
If i had a son - at 17 y/o hopefully he would not be thugging up like tray w gold teeth, pants around ass, hoodie, gangsta, etc.
Again - portray yourself like a thug, and people take notice and act accordingly, especially when there were 8 recent burgalries by black thugs in that hood recently.
as far as i know pretend girlfriends can't get pregnant :D :D :D :D
-
To anyone doubting Zimm was the aggressor:
Zimmerman admits that he was the one that approached Trayvon and Trayvon ran away. "I lost him".
Then, two blocks away, they meet again. I guess he "found" him.
Look, the minor is running home cause he doesn't know who the hell is chasing him. If the fight happened at the truck, I'd agree trayvon doubled back. But TWO BLOCKS AWAY? Zimm walked or ran to that point.
His stupid ass is going to jail. Period. I dont see any other way. He is the aggressor. He admits trayvon is running away. He's trying to catch him for pete's sake.
-
To anyone doubting Zimm was the aggressor:
Zimmerman admits that he was the one that approached Trayvon and Trayvon ran away. "I lost him".
Then, two blocks away, they meet again. I guess he "found" him.
Look, the minor is running home cause he doesn't know who the hell is chasing him. If the fight happened at the truck, I'd agree trayvon doubled back. But TWO BLOCKS AWAY? Zimm walked or ran to that point.
His stupid ass is going to jail. Period. I dont see any other way. He is the aggressor. He admits trayvon is running away. He's trying to catch him for pete's sake.
bbbbuuuuut your missing the picture,he's black :o
-
bbbbuuuuut your missing the picture,he's black :o
I hadn't caught the fact that in addition to all of this - Trayvon RAN AWAY and was long gone. Zimm self-appointed himself to track him down. THEN the confrontation happened.
That looks WORLDS worse for zimmerman now.
-
-
I hadn't caught the fact that in addition to all of this - Trayvon RAN AWAY and was long gone. Zimm self-appointed himself to track him down. THEN the confrontation happened.
That looks WORLDS worse for zimmerman now.
So, can we get back to my question about you lying?
-
trayvon fcking ran away. unreal. people say zimm wasn't the aggressor.
-
trayvon fcking ran away. unreal. people say zimm wasn't the aggressor.
Zimm probably saved taxpayers a shit load of money the way trayvon was going. Stolen jewelry, attacking a bus driver, etc.
-
Zimm probably saved taxpayers a shit load of money the way trayvon was going. Stolen jewelry, attacking a bus driver, etc.
actually, being on trial means zimmerman can't beat up his woman or commit felony assault on cops anymore too. #winning
-
actually, being on trial means zimmerman can't beat up his woman or commit felony assault on cops anymore too. #winning
he beats up women? no wonder he's a hero with some on here ;D
-
he beats up women? no wonder he's a hero with some on here ;D
he's an obama supporter. who appears to beat women. who manages to catch minors who try to run away from him.
-
he's an obama supporter. who appears to beat women. who manages to catch minors who try to run away from him.
Do you concede that the only evidence we have for who started the confrontation is zimmerman?
-
Do you concede that the only evidence we have for who started the confrontation is zimmerman?
I dont consider his self-serving testimony to be "evidence". What he gave is a STATEMENT which may be introduced into evidence. Then the jurors can decide if its a self-serving lie, or if they think it's true. He has, um, every freakin reason in the world to lie, of course, so they'll take that into consideration.
He did go after trayvon who "RAN AWAY". So even if he wasn't the aggressor at 2 feet, he was the aggressor at 2 blocks. The jury may take that into consideration. If I have run two blocks and some dude with a gun is still chasing me, you bet your ass I'm hitting him with a damn iced tea bottle... and if i'm on the jury, the only evidence I have of any pursuit or attack is the "he's running away" and the distance zimm covered in pursuit.
so again, zimmm's word is evidence of nothing.
-
Judge delays decision on Zimmerman money
Source: CNN
George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer accused of wrongly killing Trayvon Martin, will not immediately have to turn over donations to his website, a Florida judge said Friday.
Zimmerman collected about $204,000 in donations through the website, but did not disclose the contributions during his bond hearing last week, according to Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara.
Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda asked Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. to increase Zimmerman's $150,000 bond. But the judge said he would delay ruling on the request, in part because he does not know if he has the authority to do so.
Lester said he is also concerned about revealing the names of donors.
Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/27/justice/florida-zimmerman-money/index.html
-
I dont consider his self-serving testimony to be "evidence". What he gave is a STATEMENT which may be introduced into evidence. Then the jurors can decide if its a self-serving lie, or if they think it's true. He has, um, every freakin reason in the world to lie, of course, so they'll take that into consideration.
He did go after trayvon who "RAN AWAY". So even if he wasn't the aggressor at 2 feet, he was the aggressor at 2 blocks. The jury may take that into consideration. If I have run two blocks and some dude with a gun is still chasing me, you bet your ass I'm hitting him with a damn iced tea bottle... and if i'm on the jury, the only evidence I have of any pursuit or attack is the "he's running away" and the distance zimm covered in pursuit.
so again, zimmm's word is evidence of nothing.
LOL, epic knowledge of how the court system works. His words may not be evidence themselves, but they have to be proven wrong, and so far everyone you have done or said has just made you look that much more ignorant of how the Justice system works. Now your just talking to yourself, and.. well.. yeah.
You know, youd get a lot less shit if you just admitted that this is how you think the courts should work in 240 land, not how they ACTUALLY work.
So yeah, keep on keepin on with your fantasyland in which evidence is not evidence, supposition is evidence, and the Prosecution gets to sit back while the prosecution gets to make wild claims on what happened with no evidence and its up to Zimmerman (who was there) to prove them wrong.
Yeah, that totally makes sense.
Lol.
Lol. Its pretty funny watching you post things like this - trayvon fcking ran away. unreal. people say zimm wasn't the aggressor.
and then proceed to act like you somehow proved something. Hilarious.
Clearly Zimm was the aggressor that started the fight because Trayvon took off, and it utterly impossible that Zimmerman headed back to his truck and got stopped and jumped by Travyon, not like Trayvon could have taken off so that he could be in a better situation to attack him or anything. Nope, nothing else possible. Lol.
Im bowing out of this. 240 keep posting to yourself bro, keep telling yourself "Damn Zimmerman was clearly the aggressor cause Trayvon took off, no other possible intention for following him, and NO way that Zimmermans story is true and that Trayvon took off and then turned around and confronted Zimmerman when he felt like he had the advantage."
-
Judge delays decision on Zimmerman money
Source: CNN
George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer accused of wrongly killing Trayvon Martin, will not immediately have to turn over donations to his website, a Florida judge said Friday.
Zimmerman collected about $204,000 in donations through the website, but did not disclose the contributions during his bond hearing last week, according to Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara.
Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda asked Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. to increase Zimmerman's $150,000 bond. But the judge said he would delay ruling on the request, in part because he does not know if he has the authority to do so.
Lester said he is also concerned about revealing the names of donors.
Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/27/justice/florida-zimmerman-money/index.html
All mountain dew and merlot...
-
All diet mountain dew and merlot...
fixed.
-
The concept of 'burden' is only initially with the bringer of the complaint. As facts are presented, to create a compelling account that may be accepted as true by that which shall judge, the burden then shifts to the opposition, and on it will carry toward reason.
It is the only legitimate way to seek truth.
-
The concept of 'burden' is only initially with the bringer of the complaint. As facts are presented, to create a compelling account that may be accepted as true by that which shall judge, the burden then shifts to the opposition, and on it will carry toward reason.
It is the only legitimate way to seek truth.
ZImm shot trayvon. He took a life.
There are huge inconsistencies in his story now. TM circled his an but he didn't tell 911 about it? Trayvon covered his mouth, but the 911 tape was steady with no muffling?
Sounds like he was just spinning exaggerations in the interview after shooting the kid. And not thinking about the 911 calls which contradict it.
And really, if he lies about ANYTHING, you lock his punk ass up. He's not credible with "i was attacked" if he lies about a dozen little things before and after it ;)
It's like if your chick lies about bills, work, groceries, phone calls, all day long.... then she says "You can't PROVE I cheated when I stayed out all night".
you shake your head and give her the boot.
-
ZImm shot trayvon. He took a life.
There are huge inconsistencies in his story now. TM circled his an but he didn't tell 911 about it? Trayvon covered his mouth, but the 911 tape was steady with no muffling?
Sounds like he was just spinning exaggerations in the interview after shooting the kid. And not thinking about the 911 calls which contradict it.
And really, if he lies about ANYTHING, you lock his punk ass up. He's not credible with "i was attacked" if he lies about a dozen little things before and after it ;)
It's like if your chick lies about bills, work, groceries, phone calls, all day long.... then she says "You can't PROVE I cheated when I stayed out all night".
you shake your head and give her the boot.
I'm unwilling to predict too much about a case I haven't personally studied, especially a case that carries such widespread emotion, but it seems the use of 'asshole', combined with the act of following, will be what the prosecutor will use to pressure Z.
These items would indicate aggression, which is escalation, which decreases the chance for the avoidance of damage. When the act of following is added under the particular circumstances in question, such an act will be presented as wholly unnecessary.
Since damage was done, it shall now be answered, and an entity of legal judgment may in fact find Z's actions contributed to the damage. This may be found independently of any other conclusion, simply due to the Z's willful act of following under such circumstances.
If there is to be pressure on Z, this is where it will come from.
-
I love that i can grab my glock, chase a punk 2 blocks into an alley while calling him names and accusing him of a felony...
find a blind corner where nobody can see me, shoot him 15 times...
then say "self-defense, and I killed the only witness so you can't prove otherwise".
I'm gonna move on to predicting getbigger responses when he's found guilty. They'll probably blame 'race terrorists' and other booogeymen instead of just admitting zimm was an angry dude with a gun who didn't think clearly, and it cost a kid his life.
-
ZImm shot trayvon. He took a life.
There are huge inconsistencies in his story now. TM circled his an but he didn't tell 911 about it? Trayvon covered his mouth, but the 911 tape was steady with no muffling?
Sounds like he was just spinning exaggerations in the interview after shooting the kid. And not thinking about the 911 calls which contradict it.
And really, if he lies about ANYTHING, you lock his punk ass up. He's not credible with "i was attacked" if he lies about a dozen little things before and after it ;)
It's like if your chick lies about bills, work, groceries, phone calls, all day long.... then she says "You can't PROVE I cheated when I stayed out all night".
you shake your head and give her the boot.
Inconsistencies in his story?
You mean inconsistencies in the story YOU'VE made up, dumbass.
You don't know his story yet.
-
Inconsistencies in his story?
You mean inconsistencies in the story YOU'VE made up, dumbass.
You don't know his story yet.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-03/news/os-trayvon-martin-circles-george-zimmerman-20120503_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-source-police-department
Don't take my word for it - the sanford PD are the ones who pointed out the inconsistencies in zimm's story, 2 days ago.
-
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-03/news/os-trayvon-martin-circles-george-zimmerman-20120503_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-source-police-department
Don't take my word for it - the sanford PD are the ones who pointed out the inconsistencies in zimm's story, 2 days ago.
Ah yes, an unamed source - because the media's done such a good job of getting the story right thus far. ::)
And it's only incosistent if other "possible sources" are correct.
lol.
-
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-03/news/os-trayvon-martin-circles-george-zimmerman-20120503_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-source-police-department
Don't take my word for it - the sanford PD are the ones who pointed out the inconsistencies in zimm's story, 2 days ago.
BTW...this is the exact same MO you had with the Seals story.
1) Story breaks.
2) You lap up initial and semi-reliable reports.
3) From scattered and incomplete evidence you put the ENTIRE story together.
4) When things don't fit, you start claiming lying, CT, cover-up, etc. ::)
What a shock...
-
the state seems to agree with my CT taht zimmerman committed murder. so they charged him.
-
the state seems to agree with my CT taht zimmerman committed murder. so they charged him.
That's not a CT. That's a very real possibility.
Your inability to distinguish the two speaks mounds.
-
That's not a CT. That's a very real possibility.
Your inability to distinguish the two speaks mounds.
Everything is a CT to rob.
Whatever the official story is, he has to be on the opposite side.
He's getbig's Brian Griffin.
And its hilarious, cause he cant even see it himself.
-
Everything is a CT to rob.
Whatever the official story is, he has to be on the opposite side.
He's getbig's Brian Griffin.
And its hilarious, cause he cant even see it himself.
my newest CT is that you are actually zimmerman himself, attempting to soil the juror pool.
this leads to another CT that 240 is actually trayvon's mother. Always a possibility, given my erration and emotional responses on this matter.
food for thought.
-
I'll give it to 240. He's clever enough to frame the argument to his advantage. Unfortunately from what we know z didn't confront t. It was the other way around.
Now that we're finding out his statements contained lies (from the sanford PD report & prosecutors), we don't know who confronted who. ZImm's word is the ONLY evidence of that - and he lied about other things, we know that now.
We do know who chased the other one, calling him an asshole. And we know who ran to get away.
-
Free Republic
Browse · Search Pings · Mail News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
Barney Frank stuns commencement crowd during speech
WHDH-TV ^ | 5/28/12 | Victoria Block
Posted on May 28, 2012 10:16:21 PM EDT by raccoonradio
NEWTON, Mass. (WHDH) -- Democratic Representative Barney Frank raised eyebrows during his commencement speech at UMass Dartmouth when he referenced the Trayvon Martin case.
Barney Frank, never at a loss for words, drew gasps from the commencement crowd at UMass Dartmouth where his good friend Hubie Jones was awarded an honorary doctorate -- complete with a degree and hood.
"When they give you an honorary doctorate they give you one of these and Hubie, I think you now got a hoodie you can wear and no one will shoot at you," Frank said during his speech.
The crowd was stunned by the humor, and many in his district felt it was in poor taste.
“That’s terrible. That’s insensitive. I don't think that's an appropriate joke," one woman said.
The hoodie joke was a clear reference to the controversial Florida shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman -- a shooting that has drawn thousands into the streets demanding justice for the young black man who was wearing a hoodie at the time of the shooting.
Jones, a long time social activist told 7News, "I don't believe Barney Frank meant any harm. He's a quick witted guy and within the context of the commencement it was a surprise."
For Frank, it should be no surprise that he was forced to explain himself in a statement, which says in part:
"I wore a hooded gown in three ceremonies earlier this year…used the same joke on myself…I shamelessly recycled the hoodie joke."
He went on to say he "used the ‘hoodie’ line to ridicule the notion that a hooded sweatshirt is somehow sinister."
Frank said he thinks the world of Hubie, but some of Frank's constituents don't think as highly of him.
"I definitely think he owes an apology to Hubie and then to the community
as well," a woman said.
Hubie Jones and Barney Frank have been good friends and have worked alongside each other for decades.
Read more: http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/12007593498827/barney-frank-stuns-commencement-crowd-during-speech/#ixzz1wDl3V2Z9
-
Now that we're finding out his statements contained lies (from the sanford PD report & prosecutors), we don't know who confronted who. ZImm's word is the ONLY evidence of that - and he lied about other things, we know that now.
We do know who chased the other one, calling him an asshole. And we know who ran to get away.
So you mean Trayvon actually RAN to get away and was pursued by the Adult carrying the gun?
-
So you mean Trayvon actually RAN to get away and was pursued by the Adult carrying the gun?
Yes. ZImmerman's exact words told the 911 operator that trayvon was running away.
The unarmed kid was running away with his candy. ZImmerman couldn't allow that - not this time.
-
Yes. ZImmerman's exact words told the 911 operator that trayvon was running away.
The unarmed kid was running away with his candy. ZImmerman couldn't allow that - not this time.
He thought he might be armed and on drugs, which he was.
-
He thought he might be armed and on drugs, which he was.
As a sworn police officer, he would have the legal right to pursue and accost Trayvon for being high (yes, THC in system, and we know how violent that makes people) and armed (um, he was not).
But zimmerman wasn't a cop. He was just another fat fuck coming home from Target with a 6 pack on a sunday afternoon, deciding to bully a teenage to feel better about his own 4 inch penis.
And it wouldn't matter if itw as Ted Bundy on his block - you call the police and let them handle it. he ASSUMED trayvon was armed, a burglar, etc - and he was WRONG.
And now that the sanford PD is revealing zimmerman was LYING in his account that night, it's getting awfully quiet from the zimm defenders in here ;)
-
As a sworn police officer, he would have the legal right to pursue and accost Trayvon for being high (yes, THC in system, and we know how violent that makes people) and armed (um, he was not).
But zimmerman wasn't a cop. He was just another fat fuck coming home from Target with a 6 pack on a sunday afternoon, deciding to bully a teenage to feel better about his own 4 inch penis.
And it wouldn't matter if itw as Ted Bundy on his block - you call the police and let them handle it. he ASSUMED trayvon was armed, a burglar, etc - and he was WRONG.
And now that the sanford PD is revealing zimmerman was LYING in his account that night, it's getting awfully quiet from the zimm defenders in here ;)
Not defending anything, just think this story is pure nonsense and to see the usual race hustlers melting down over it is beyond wierd.
dozens and dozens of shooting each week by ghetto savages and not a peep, one incident like this and all of a sudden is a national tradegy.
Ridiciulous.
-
Not defending anything, just think this story is pure nonsense and to see the usual race hustlers melting down over it is beyond wierd.
dozens and dozens of shooting each week by ghetto savages and not a peep, one incident like this and all of a sudden is a national tradegy.
Ridiciulous.
if you violate another person's rights, and shoot them, you belong in prison.
Zimmerman lied about a lot of shit. It's coming out. many of us smelled bullshit from his first sentence on that 911 call, others took longer.
Looks more and more like he is a liar. You can't lie after you shoot someone - it's just one of those rules lol.
-
Not defending anything, just think this story is pure nonsense and to see the usual race hustlers melting down over it is beyond wierd.
dozens and dozens of shooting each week by ghetto savages and not a peep, one incident like this and all of a sudden is a national tradegy.
Ridiciulous.
You sure the fuck did. Maybe he should have shot Michael Phelps when he left a party after getting high.. Get this weak ass shit out of here.. I see this morning youre gonna be my punching bag. This dumb ass comment.
"he was high on drugs" BITCH.. that means he deserved to get shot? Man you have zero respect for reality
-
You sure the fuck did. Maybe he should have shot Michael Phelps when he left a party after getting high.. Get this weak ass shit out of here.. I see this morning youre gonna be my punching bag. This dumb ass comment.
"he was high on drugs" BITCH.. that means he deserved to get shot? Man you have zero respect for reality
no - but pants around ass, walkin g like a thug, gold teeth, drugs, loitering in the dark, etc makes it far more likely to get looked at like a potential threat than had trayvon been dressed normally.
FACT