General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (XemaSab) on Tue Jul 23, 2013, 01:12 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
rainy
(6,321 posts)
MaeScott
(971 posts)....and his hood string was pulled almost from the hood. Z was trying to " detain" the teen.. He put his hands on that child...then he shot him when Trayvon tried to defend himself.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)So YES, Zimmerman did hit Martin - with a bullet to the heart.
NONE? 
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)
applegrove
(132,217 posts)he was leaning way, way over George. And the gun came out of the wasteband of George. Trayvon may not have even seen the gun. Whoever was screaming (George says it was him) waited less than a second to shoot after he stopped screaming.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)How was Trayvon supporting himself. Did his pant legs have mud on them? Did they show that Trayvon had kneeled or put his knees on the ground?
Could you describe how Trayvon was leaning way, way over Zimmerman?
I haven't been able to picture how Trayvon leaned over Zimmerman.
Was Trayvon sitting on Zimmerman's legs? Was he kneeling on the ground, straddling Zimmerman?
If so, where would the placement of Trayvon's knees have been in relationship to Zimmerman's body? At what point on Zimmerman's body would they have been?
I can't see how, if Trayvon was leaning over Zimmerman, Zimmerman could have pulled out his gun. Seems to me his holster would have hit the ground somewhere. I can't see how Zimmerman could have pulled the gun out of his holster and shot Trayvon pretty close to straight in the chest. Seems to me Zimmerman's arm would have had difficulty crossing in front of his body to get a right angle. The story is just not credible to me.
applegrove
(132,217 posts)exactly what happened. One thing for sure, I don't think Trayvon threatened Zimmerman's life. That was a lie.
ksoze
(2,068 posts)To picture how he may have been leaning over Zimmerman, watch the trial - the PROSECUTION demonstrates it with a dummy.
kaiden
(1,314 posts)There were NO grass stains OR dirt on his khaki-colored skinny jeans.
wercal
(1,370 posts)These photos were taken by the defense, under the supervision of the police.
There are grass stains. You can scroll down for yourself and see the photo here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/09/1214336/-DNA-Report-does-NOT-support-Zimmerman-s-claim-that-Trayvon-Martin-caused-his-injuries
You can choose, as some have here, not to believe this.
You can claim, as some have, the stains were applied later.
You can claim, as others have, that these aren't the same pants.
You can claim, as others have, that this is just some rw website.
Or you can accept the fact that there are stains right there for your eyes to see.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)with his gun in his hand facing Trayvon and when Trayvon saw that he tried to tackle Zimmerman? Because what I can't figure out is how Zimmerman could have held his gun pretty much so that the bullet hit Trayvon in the middle of the chest at what was only slightly an angle toward the left. Where were Zimmerman's elbows? I just can't get a sense of the movement of Zimmerman's elbows. Where were his forearm and elbow as he reached for the gun in the holster at his side?
Where were Trayvon's arms? It just doesn't make sense to me. Usually if someone grapples someone to the ground they secure the person below's arms so that the person below can't get free. They secure that with a hand, or something.
What makes sense to me is that Zimmerman may have met Trayvon with his gun drawn or drawn it shortly after seeing Trayvon and then Trayvon tried to tackle Zimmerman. That would be more in line with their personalities and would explain the physical evidence.
wercal
(1,370 posts)Now you touched on something that I believe to be the weakest part of Zimmerman's story. During his re-enactment, he states that when he sees Martin, he goes for his cell phone...and Martin thinks he is going for a gun.
Quite simply, I don't believe that. I believe Zimmerman was scared, and probably at very least had his hand on the gun. And why would he suspect Martin thought he was 'going for his gun'...and explain it away as his going for his cell phone? It doesn't pass the smell test.
So yes it is possible that Z had his gun in hand...still holstered, before the fight started. It may even explain why he fell to the ground after being punched...losing his balance rather than take his hand off the gun.
But none of that can be proven. I think when the jurors start to talk, they will say as much. They probably didn't believe Martin just hauled off and punched him for absolutely no reason...and they probably don't believe Zimmerman's head hit the concrete 20-30 times.
However, there was most definitely a fight. And based on the evidence, injuries, and John Good's testimony, it is hard to discredit Zimmerman's story.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)see page 127 http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/Zimmerman_Discovery.pdf
Based on Dr Di Maio's testimony, the gun was in contact with Martin's clothing and 2-4" from Martin's body when the trigger was pulled.
Neither of those support your scenario, nor does witness testimony, Zimmerman's injuries and that Martin's pants were wet from the knees down, while the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet.
ksoze
(2,068 posts)A shot at night will not show that detail
bushisanidiot
(8,064 posts)it was a combination straddle and laying on top of zimmerman.
they showed trayvons legs spread wide apart with his crotch area down below zimmermans
waist.. almost like trayvon was laying just above zimmerman's knees. the defense did this
to make an excuse for how trayvon and zimmerman could get to zimmerman's gun.
there's no way that cartoon was accurate. the prosecution didn't even challenge it.
Tommy_Carcetti
(44,498 posts)The hearing went on something like 3-4 hours after the end of court, during which time the Judge grew visibly frustrated with the defense counsel.
Nonetheless, she allowed in the cartoon not as direct evidence of what was testified to, but as a demonstrative aid as to what the defense was arguing.
I don't know if the jury, as lay persons, actually drew that distinction. The judge should have just left the whole thing out, IMHO.
yardwork
(69,364 posts)I think that Zimmerman, fantasizing about being a cop, tried to "apprehend" Trayvon. Zimmerman may have grabbed the front of Trayvon's shirt.
From Trayvon's point of view he was attacked by a stranger. OF COURSE he resisted. He was terrified - for good reason.
Zimmerman executed an unarmed teenager. The fact that a lot of people think that is just fine says terrible things about our country. I know I don't plan to to Florida ever again, and gun control - never a big focus to me - has jumped much higher on my list if priorities.
The Second Amendment shouldn't give white people the right to shoot any black male they happen to see.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)it wasn't presented at trial. The fabric would have been wrinkled and stretched.
yardwork
(69,364 posts)pintobean
(18,101 posts)did they have, and not present?
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)Because someone from the Prosecutor's office called and told them there was no case and the let GZ go. Then the national outrage sparked charges...three weeks later.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)They took the gun, DNA swabs, his clothes & car keys at a minimum, plus photos of his injuries: See pages 5-8 at the link
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/Zimmerman_Discovery.pdf
Tommy_Carcetti
(44,498 posts)I didn't recall there any testimony regarding such analysis, but that doesn't necessarily mean there wasn't.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)maybe during the trial. Found the photo
http://www.cfnews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2012/5/17/zimmerman_discovery_.html
Photo of Zimmerman's hands seems to have been taken the night of the shooting at the police station given the clothes and there is nothing to indicate that he had struck anything or anyone. I would presume that bruising should start showing several hours afterward.
With Martin dying almost immediately, the medical experts have testified that there would be no visible bruising on the body and that the ME would have to had cut open Martin's hands to find evidence of internal bruising that would indicate Martin struck Zimmerman. I don't know ME policy, but would suggest that in the absence of a compelling need, a ME is not going to autopsy the body to the point of making the funeral a closed casket affair.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)Please proceed in your pretense.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)As for any drug alcohol tests, the Sanford Police did not seek a warrant to obtain permission to have those tests taken. You are aware that a warrant signed by a judge is required?
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)Judges sign warrants all the time, now what was GZ's BAC? They know Trayvon's. What drugs were in GZ's system? They know what was in Trayvon's.
Your link shows s.o.p. not a real investigation and you know it.
Rex
(65,616 posts)We have no idea what drugs Z was on, because the cops completely covered for him after the murder.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Sanford PD saw nothing that suggested Zimmerman was under the influence of alcohol, illegal drugs or any other drugs. So without probable cause to believe he was under the influence, they had nothing to petition a judge with for a warrant.
doc03
(39,086 posts)of a murder?
Sanford PD saw nothing that suggested Zimmerman was under the influence of alcohol, illegal drugs or any other drugs. So without probable cause to believe he was under the influence, they had nothing to petition a judge with for a warrant.
They did not perform alcohol and drug tests on Martin because they thought he was on something, but because toxicology reports are standard procedure in an autopsy.
doc03
(39,086 posts)he was on something? So if you have a cop with a similar mindset of playing vigilante
and gunning someone down he just lets you go. I would think any cop would investigate such things to cover his own ass. It is obvious the police were on his side and went out of their way even to point of taking him to the scene of the murder to fabricate a story to fit the evidence. I think the broken nose was self inflicted myself and if his head was being beaten on concrete like he said there would be a lot of blood. The slightest head wound bleeds a lot and there very was little blood on him. No blood or DNA from Zimmerman on Martin after hitting him in the nose and putting his hands around his head and beating it on the walk, I don't buy it at all.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)you are free to use the word stalking, but it is not supported by the legal definition of stalking:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0784/Sections/0784.048.html
Sanford PD apparently had no reason to believe that Zimmerman was under under the influence of anything and to get a warrant for a blood test they needed probable cause.
As for the rest, take up it up with the prosecution, because they presented no arguments to dispute Zimmerman's story or the physical evidence.
doc03
(39,086 posts)have and didn't. Who always works hand in hand with the police (the prosecution). It's just in their DNA to support
what the police say. I don't know what else you would call it but stalking when you pick out someone when there wasn't
even a crime and follow him and confront him and kill him. From what all I have heard about Z I think he had a gun and was
looking for an excuse to use it. Don't you know any wantabee cops? I know a couple of them myself, just like Z. Sure he wasn't
found guilty but that doesn't mean he is inocent. OJ was found not guilty too.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)and physical evidence supported the defendant. That is a far simpler answer then some sort of conspiracy.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)Didn't stop them from testing the VICTIM, did it?
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)test him after he MURDERED A BOY 17 YEARS, 22 days old. HE was doing nothing other than walking home after a snack run.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)I've been in a number of accidents and I've never been tested for alcohol & drugs.
As for the rest, the jury found him not guilty.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)while a fucked up, lying, violent, racist, overzealous wannabe, fumbling through the lies and an inconsistant story that the police pointed out to him, isn't? I'm sorry, I was confused.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)since you don't seem to understand concepts like probable cause or when a warrant is needed or that the law isn't what you want it to be.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)a dust up with someone or assautled someone. Cops arrived and they were asked if they'd had a drink or smoked a little something. I the law applied EQUALLY to everyone, HIS MURDERING ASS WOULD HAVE BEEN TESTED! Apparently, SOME folks are happy is sorry ass wasn't tested. Things might have turned out VERY differently.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Regardless you are still wrong. The police need probable cause to think someone is under the influence before they can get a warrant to have a blood test taken.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)Look, I KNOW WHAT THE FUCK I'm talking about but you've decided that I'm lying and being a book says one thing and REALITY says another, I'm an idiotic liar. You now, you might find that the way America treats her brown * black children IS A LOT different that the way she treats her white.
Rex
(65,616 posts)You cannot speak for the PD which fucked up a lot in this investigation. Sorry, but your opinion means nothing here.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)and your opinion is meaningless, since you are more interested in discussing opinions instead of the actual facts of the case. Probably because the facts don't fit your idea of what happened.
brush
(61,033 posts)Like adderol that makes you very aggressive, as in stalking and killing someone.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)"Might have been" means you don't know. "Might have been" leaves enough room for doubt to drive to let an 18-wheeler do a U-turn. The prosecution can't use "Might have been", the prosecustion has to prove what DID happen.
Further, Dr. DiMaio addressed that possibility and showed why Z grabbing the front of TM's shirt would have changed the forensics. The bullet holes would not have lined up the same way from a grabbed shirt as from a hanging shirt.
yardwork
(69,364 posts)I don't believe that you or the majority of Zimmerman supporters think that Zimmerman actually had to kill in self defense. You know that is bs.
You're glad that your right to shoot "suspicious" minorities is intact. I intend to do what I can to take that privilege away from you. I really am coming for your guns now.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)If you will check the FBI statistics you will find that more people are killed each year with hand and feet as the only weapons than are killed by rifle fire shotgun fire combined. Here is the link to the FBI web page:http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8
There are many places on the human body where a single, strong, punch can kill. If someone, (white, black, brown, or green with purple dots) is sitting on you and beating on you with their fists, then you are in deadly danger and are justified in shooting them to stop the beating.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Do you deny that Zimmerman killed Martin with a gun and that Martin was unarmed and walking home? Who was the aggressor here in this situation?
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)The law is very clear on self-defense. If #1 starts a fight by hitting #2, the fight progresses, #1 tries to withdraw from the fight, then #2 does NOT get to beat on #1 any more. If #2 continues to hit #1, the #2 becomes the agressor and #1 becomes the defender.
TM was on top of Z. John Good, who was only a few feet away, says that the guy on bottom was screaming for help. Screaming for help is a clear signal that the guy on bottom wants the fight to stop. He has had enough. The guy on top kept hitting the guy on bottom. The guy on bottom is now the defender, and the situation is sufficiently severe that he can use deadly force.
There are places on the human body where one strong hit can kill. TM was not a weakling. More people are killed each year by hands & feet than by all the rifle and shotgun fire combined.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Please don't reply if you are just going to make stuff up, thanks.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Not making stuff up. The initial agressor, if he tries to quit and the other guy continues the fight, the initial agressor then becomes the defender. You don't get to keep beating on someone once they try to withdraw or surrender. I am amazed that you are not able to understand that.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Section 776.041 paragraph a
Before you accuse people of making stuff up maybe you should do some research to avoid looking like someone who has no clue what they are talking about.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)Last edited Sun Jul 21, 2013, 09:23 PM - Edit history (1)
stories have we read where little got a hold of a loaded gun? Do you know how silly you sound? EVERYTHING could have been avoided, if that fat child molester had stayed his ass IN.HIS.TRUCK instead of playing billy badass. Had he left Trayvon the FUCK alone, Tray would have been PERFECTLY harmless. He couldn't honestly use the fact that he didn't know when the cops would arrive because he'd not only gone on ridealongs but had called them to the complex enough to be able to time it down to the minute. I DON'T BUY his story other than possibly, his name and I ain't too sure about that.
Rex
(65,616 posts)It is very revealing of their character.
They just WILL NOT type that an unarmed teenager was shot and killed by an adult with a gun. I would mean their gun humping is all a sick fetish and they know it.
jobycom
(49,038 posts)Last I saw, the evidence was that the gun was touching the sweatshirt, and there was no way to determine how far away the barrel would have been from the chest. The examiner ruled that the shot was "intermediate" based on the lack of powder residue and the pattern of burning on Trayvon's flesh, but that could have been explained by the two layers of clothing between the barrel and his skin. Was there some new evidence to overrule that? I've googled and found nothing, but obviously googling anything about the trial right now leads to a lot of random stuff.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)but not the skin when the trigger was pulled. He testified that the clothing was 2"-4" from Martin based on stippling and powder residue. Since he has literally written the books on the subject, his testimony is very credible.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)that zimmie was pinning Tray down because his shirt hung out so far from his body. Tray was THIN...SLENDER. Not too long ago, I was less than size 0 due to stage 4 cancer and a horrific NTERNAL infection that resulted in gangrene of my organs. Loose tops hung away from my body when I was standing up and at one point, while at the cancer center in Phoenix, I went to the store, Fry's grocery, which is about .5 mi away. I was wearing , (GASP) a hoodie which had a Kangaroo pocket on it. I placed my purchases in that pockest and it pulled that hoodie AT LEAST 4 inches from my body. I don't buy that crap about how it was impossible for Tray to be any other place EXCEPT on top of fat by zimshit because I know from first hand experience that that is JUST NOT TRUE.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)even they think Martin was on top based on their actions and statements during the trial.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)trying to lose that case. I STAND BY MY STATEMENT.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)which might be why Corey decided to bypass the Grand Jury.
I often find the simplest explanation is usually right and a case where most of the testimony and physical evidence supports the defendant, usually doesn't give the prosecution much to work with.
As to the prosecution throwing case, that seems pretty silly when it would have an adverse effect on their public career or a career in the private sector if they were thinking about one.
Control-Z
(15,686 posts)
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)How about Mr. & Mrs. Manalo? Jayne Surdyka? Selma Mora?
Pelican
(1,156 posts)... but said he didn't see any connect.
Martin may have just been flattening the earth around the head to make it more aesthetically pleasing.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)uppityperson
(116,020 posts)Pelican
(1,156 posts)IOW, he saw the black teenager in the dark hoodie on top throwing punches at the hispanic guy in the red top on the bottom.
Not to mention the physical evidence (wounds, bullet forensics etc...)
The witnesses you are referring to talked about "the big one on the smaller one"
Hard to compare...
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Facts can be real unpleasant sometimes.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Do you have any sympathy for Trayvon?
Pelican
(1,156 posts)There was zero evidence that Zimmerman acted violently again Martin other than the gunshot.
There was evidence that Martin acted violently against Zimmerman. Zimmerman's head wounds and facial wounds, Martin's wounds on his hands, gun forensics that show Martin on top and witness testimony that Martin was on top attacking.
Do we know with utter certainty who started what based on evidence? No.
The reality though, is that the benefit of the doubt goes to the one that has the most evidence, even if it is not 100% conclusive. That would be Zimmerman and that's why the jury ruled the way they did.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Pelican
(1,156 posts)If he started it then I don't. If he was killed in cold blood then I do...
Since I don't know, I'm neutral. I'll be honest and admit that I enjoy splashing the cold water of facts and objectivity on everyones inflamed emotions more than I have an actual investment in either side.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)Yeah, Trayvon started the whole thing and you have no sympathy. Wtf
Pelican
(1,156 posts)... unlike some.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)Trayvon "started it"? And all this time I thought he was just walking back after getting snacks at the store. I guess he "started it" by walking with skittles? WTF.
And it is good to admit "I don't know what happened during the entire confrontation" as some here do. However, "he started it" (maybe) is seriously messed up. Walking to his Dad's girlfriend's house at 7 pm was how he "started it"? No. Zimmy instigated the whole thing between them Zimmy started it.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)... and then it all fell apart.
Of course he didn't do anything wrong by buying skittles or walking on the street. Duh...
What he may have done wrong was overreact, with physical violence, to Zimmerman walking behind him. Teenagers do stupid things when they feel slighted.
If that is what happend, then I don't have the sympathy I would if Zimmerman walked up and popped him in the chest out of the blue.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)"slighted", THEN you have no sympathy for him.
Trayvon felt "slighted" by being followed by a creep? Oh kay. I am done here.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)and plus he was back. Some only have sympathy for killers, not victims. Zimmerman did exactly what some the worst gun nuts would like to do. I wonder how many have gone hunting for their own black man to shoot since the verdict? One here has said he isn't ever concerned about Zimmerman's future victims but is instead worried about poor Zimmerman. Evidently we should spend our time worrying about killers instead of victims. If the victim doesn't have a gun, he's worthless as far as some are concerned.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)
Arkansas Granny
(32,265 posts)a young man who had done nothing wrong or suspicious.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)... but he has every right legally to do so.
How are you going to make a law that says you can walk in the same direction that someone else is for a few minutes?
It seems like it's the gun that scares you and not the action itself.
Arkansas Granny
(32,265 posts)who has done nothing wrong, provoke a confrontation and then shoot them and claim self-defense because they become "afraid" for their life.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)BainsBane
(57,757 posts)He is asking if you feel any sense of compassion or humanity. Your answer about the trial is irrelevant. You weren't on the jury. You weren't a judge.
Is that your excuse for having absolutely not concern over the shedding of innocent blood? Because a killer had a gun you privilege him above his victim? A boy was stalked and killed while minding his own business walking home from the store and you can't find any sympathy in yourself? 
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)BainsBane
(57,757 posts)The question was do you have compassion for Trayvon Martin. You obviously do not, or you wouldn't pretend you were in a trial. Your response was completely non-responsive.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)You are emotional. You identify with Zimmerman because you carry a gun and see yourself doing what he did. You fear someone attacking you, so you sympathize with Zimmerman and believe his version of events. To pretend that isn't based on emotion is ludicrous. You gunners act like human compassion is a negative emotion while the fear and paranoia that grip you is somehow rational. It's the other way around. There is nothing rational about your position on this case or on guns in general. Your entire ideology is based on paranoia. The rest of us don't go through life so frightened we feel we need to carry a gun to get through the day.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)kaiden
(1,314 posts)Pelican
(1,156 posts)We know there was a fight and that they were in contact. We know they were on top of each other and in physical contact no matter who you believe was on top (forensics aside)
All this does is reinforce that the corpse and the clothes were not properly collected as the defense pointed out.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)The prosecution's witness, the CSI tech, stated that an absence of DNA was not proof of anything either way. That testimony was reinforced by the testimony of Dr Di Maio, who stated the same thing.
We don't know if the DNA was there and washed off by the rain, was there and lost due to the handling of the body by the ME office or that it was never there to begin with.
I know you wanted Zimmerman behind bars, but you don't get to convict someone based on the above possibilities.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)Boom Sound 416
(4,185 posts)Trayvon was on top.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Manalo came out a few seconds AFTER the shot and saw Z on top.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)
OwnedByCats
(805 posts)There are two very good reasons not to ASSUME anything. One, we weren't there. Two, the prosecution did not show evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman killed in cold blood. There is overwhelming evidence to support self defense. When I heard he was charged with 2nd degree, I thought they had something big. I watched that trial every single day, they had very little to support their supposition of what may or may not have occurred. Based on the evidence, not emotion, and in accordance with the law they could not find him guilty. Regardless of his intentions, the evidence just wasn't there. He either really did kill in self defense, or he covered his tracks well.
Now if you really want to sink your teeth into a case where a black teen was killed - look up about the Michael Dunn case. He shot and killed Jordan Davis, also 17, and also in Florida. His trial is in Sept. Now this guy seems really disturbed and could be racist. After looking at the case, if evidence is provided, I think he does belong in prison, but only a jury can make that determination.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)
nenagh
(1,925 posts)No mention of head at all..
He initially said ground and pound like motions..but he never saw any fists
So it may have been more of a holding Zimmerman down at that time..
We will never know when Zimmerman 'unholstered' his gun.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)1) Holding someone down - a static action
2) Ground and pound - physical violence
The likely reality is that the jury heard the initial report, the ground and pound part, and gave it more credibility than all the technicalities that the prosecution tried to get out of him to take it back.
I seriously have no idea why the prosecution called that guy. He was the second best witness for the defense.
nenagh
(1,925 posts)hyping the physical violence scenario.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)They believed the white man over the black woman. They valued a white killer's life over an innocent black teenager. Obviously they aren't alone in thinking African Americans lives are worthless.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)One random witness vs the other random witness...
What about the black woman who testified for the defense? Or is that double-reverse-super-secret-double-stamp-it-no-erasies racism?
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)I doubt you'll have to wait long.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)uppityperson
(116,020 posts)didn't see Trayvon hit Zimmy like you claim.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)How did Z get the injuries?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)uppityperson
(116,020 posts)GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Eyewitness accounts often conflict on details, but can be put together to form a coherent whole. John Good was closest, with best visibility, and remained fairly calm on the phone.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Then came the "enhancements" and then the one provided much later by the cops.
For all we know he was unhurt that night and then worked with the cops to cover their ass and falsify his injuries to build a self defense case when this got national attention.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Manalo was on the scene in less than ten seconds. Manalo was the one who took the pictures, immediately. Good also stepped out of his door fairly quickly too. Police arrived fairly fast too. Too many people watching to be able to get away with faking wounds.
Your fake-the-wounds-later accusation fails.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Here's the scenario. The night of the incident he goes to the cop shop without a scratch. They let him go. Shit hits the fan as the story goes national. The cops work with him to manufacture the evidence to make it look like he was in a struggle for his life and snap pictures and claim they were from that night.
Get it?
Boudica the Lyoness
(2,899 posts)About 6 minutes in you'll find your answer.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Now the Feds need to check this guy's bank account.
You would be surprised how many people can be bought for five or ten grand.
There was someone I recall right after this went down that said the cops were bullying the residents. One of those, "No, you didn't see that, did you." things. It was after this case went national just before the police chief resigned.
Remember that?
wercal
(1,370 posts)"You would be surprised how many people can be bought for five or ten grand."
I would love to hear some specific examples, since you seem to be an expert on it.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Don't tell me you believe there is something magical about the legal system where the truth always comes out.
wercal
(1,370 posts)This is not about me. You seem to be quite familiar with public officials being bought off for as little as $5,000.
I'd just like to see a specific example of this....you know, to make sure you weren't just making stuff up on the interwebs.
You are accusing at least four prosecuting attorneys, as well as an untold number of policemen and evidence technicians of corruption - based upon your unique knowledge that they can each be bought off for $5k. That is a serious charge (and frankly there are some logistical aspects of this that make it practically impossible). But, as long as you're charging people who are complete strangers to you, based on nothing but your knowledge of corruption...I'd like to know. Where else have you seen a prosecutor throw a case for $5k.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)I said witnesses can be bought.
The public officials didn't even want to bring this to trial and were highly motivated to seeing to it that the case went the way that it did. A "not guilty" verdict would justify why they let him go in the first place and fit the narrative that they did nothing wrong.
The alternative would be millions for a dead kid they STILL consider to be a nobody. They're probably still pissed that they lost their police chief over this case.
wercal
(1,370 posts)In your post 56 you very clearly accuse the police
...not a witness.
So an example of what you just know to be true would give you a shred if credibility.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)And then I said the Feds should look at the bank account of the witness in question to see if bribery took place.
I don't trust ANYTHING that came out in that trial.
Why do you?
Haven't you ever heard of a show trial?
wercal
(1,370 posts)As soon as the event happened, everyone sprung into action. Zimmerman was bloodied up and/or those photos were staged later. The police covered everything up and changed witness stories. The state special prosecutor who charged with murder was really doing a rope a dope all along. And so were the prosecution team.
Oh yeah, and the police/prosecution (I can't keep up) bribed a witness...apparently instantaneously before the witness gave an initial statement to police. They did this while they were 'bullying' the other witnesses...but this one was special and was bribed for $5k.
But the cops - they didn't need $5k, they falsified evidence for free. And so did the prosecution team.
Because....well because there was some great conspiracy to protect Zimmerman...because....well that doesn't matter. Dozens of cops, evidence technicians, civilian witnesses, Zimmerman's doctor, four different attorneys for the prosecution...they all risked their reputation because...well there was a conspiracy, or something like that....or they were paid off because that just happens all the time. And this is all orchestrated so well that it is practically undetectable to all, save the skilled internet sleuths who know better.
Just a hunch...but are you a 911 truther?
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)Zims daddy is a judge and had something to blackmail everyone with.
wercal
(1,370 posts)As being a reasonable, clear minded thinker, so you can't go all conspiracy theory now.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)I'm not sure if you mean your post as serious or sarcasm. I am treating it as serious so if it is sarcasm, I apologize. A few years ago Virginia revised their Justice of the Peace system and replaced them with Magistrates who performed the same functions. Z's dad was a magistrate in Virginia, IOW - he was the same as a JP in another state.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)Whatever the grounds for the civil lawsuit would be, they still exist and the Martin family can sue.
There is nothing about this conspiracy that would change that.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)The point is that you seem to think that there was a conspiracy to acquit Zimmerman to protect against a civil suit from the Martin family.
Let's start from the beginning: A civil suit about what? How did the city cause Martin's death?
wercal
(1,370 posts)Raise your hand if you:
1. Don't believe he would be that dishonest
2. Don't believe he is clever enough to put together such a conspiracy
Sorry...slow typing with just one hand.
So how 'bout it.....you a 'truther' or not?
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)During Clinton the Republicans claimed Clinton was only going on about Middle East terrorism because he was trying to distract everyone from Monica, Monica, Monica.
After Bush got in they treated all talk of Middle East terrorism as nonsense from a bunch of former Clinton loyalists trying to help their old boss with his legacy.
Comments like, "I don't want to hear about it" and "Okay, you covered your ass" backs that up.
It's not that they "LIHOP" It's more like they didn't believe in it so it was "Let It Happen From Stupidity".
Republicans think EVERYTHING is fake and a lie because that's what THEY DO and they just assume that's the way the world works and the Democrats do the same thing. They think EVERYONE does that so when something REAL crosses their path they ascribe the worse possible motives to it. After 9/11 left them flat footed they engaged in a whitewash to absolve themselves of any blame for their incompetence.
Want to call that being a "Truther" because it doesn't fit the 911 Commission Report?
Fine.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)You posted a link elsewhere, but it just had Benjamin Crump saying there was witness intimidation, and no evidence.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)I watched a neighbor in tears saying the cops were telling people to remember things their way,...with Trayvon as the bad guy.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)and I'm surprised it is not reported anywhere
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)Not a single thing in that link says has any evidence of witness intimidation. Didn't you read it before you posted it?
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)The reason you had to do it again was because the first link you posted (and the other one elsewhere) did not support any evidence for witness intimidation.
NOR DOES THIS ONE.
Try reading your articles for more than just the words witness intimidation.
From your article:
Female witness #12 went from seeing two men on the ground, unable to tell who was on top, to suddenly having the epiphany that Zimmerman was on top—“because she recognized his size based on news reports.”
Male witness #6 definitely sounds like someone has spoken to him, going from a clear and unequivocal testimony that “Martin was on top of Zimmerman and throwing down punches mixed martial arts style” and that Zimmerman was the one calling for help, to now claiming he can’t really say anything except Martin was on top of Zimmerman.
Do, if there was witness intimidation in support of a conspiracy to acquit Zimmerman, why did these two change their stories to make it worse for Zimmerman?
Go ahead, find another one. Specifically, find the story you remember of a girl crying about the police intimidating her.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)It's better than your method of simply just making stuff up out of thin air and asserting it without evidence.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)That, and knowing the way the South has always dealt with it when the victim is black. Their first reaction when it's racial is to claim it's not and their first reaction to a black victim is to claim he brought it on himself.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)That which can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. You have no evidence of your claim so it can be dimissed without the need for rebuttal.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)and honest.. and NEVER will.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)How do you explain then the pictures taken of GZ by his neighbor ON THE SCENE.
Besides, I don't understand the need to manufacture evidence. There was a fight between Trayvon and Zim. There were three witnesses to said fight.
Do you believe there was no fight at all?
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)I believe the screaming was Trayvon begging for his life and Zimmerman shot him in cold blood.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)That's it? You don't believe that during that Martin ever hit Zimmerman once, even in self defense?
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)The only question I have is who's long black police type flashlight was that? Trayvon who was just going to the store and back or the wanabe cop? If it was Zimmerman that means he had probably blinded Trayvon first thing by shining that thing in his face.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)But you didn't answer my question.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)A. You think all three witnesses who heard and saw a fight were lying
B. Zims injuries were self inflicted (or, anything but being hit by Martin)
C. Jenteal is totally wrong in her assumption that there was a fight.
Correct?
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Two medical examiners testified that TM was leaning over Z when Z shot him.
And John Good saw the fight from only a few feet away. He said that TM was on top. The prosecution even conceeded that TM was on top.
John Good testified that the guy on bottom was the one screaming for help.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Don't you get it that it was the goal of the prosecution to LOSE this case?
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)But there ought to be some sort of evidence. During the trial most people were convinced of how wonderful the prosecution was.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Things like metadata on the digital photos establishing their actual date would be a start. Then full disclosure of all city expenditures, phone logs, full interviews with every witness as if for the first time, possible re-autopsy.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)I don't buy into woo-woo conspiracies. Too many people would have to have signed on to the conspiracy, and they have no reason to be helping Z.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)You can go there by yourself.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)BainsBane
(57,757 posts)A shitty prosecution doesn't change the fact he killed an unarmed teenager.
Ghost of Tom Joad
(1,443 posts)"Eyewitness misidentification is the single greatest cause of wrongful convictions nationwide, playing a role in nearly 75% of convictions overturned through DNA testing."
http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/Eyewitness-Misidentification.php?gclid=CIiVjqzau7gCFURp7Aod9BYAXw
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)That is why a skillful investigator uses multiple eyewitnesses to piece together what happened. There was a movie, Vantage Point, that is about that very same thing - multiple witnesses, each seeing things a bit differently.
In the Navy I was an investigations officer. Mostly I did accident reconstructions of serious accidents, mostly fatalities, and a few criminal investigations. I encountered the same thing - witness remembering things differently. But a good investigator can take all the testimony, see the common elements, and along with the physical evidence, construct an accurate picture.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)Jayne Surdyka?
http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/people/witnesses/witness-18-files-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-case/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/26/jayne-surdyka_n_3503189.html
Selma Mora?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/28/trayvon-martin-witness-denies-aggressor
The person on top was wearing a garment in "some sort of a pattern between blacks and reds", she said, which were the colours of a jacket Zimmerman was wearing that night.
Jeannee Manalo?
http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/people/witnesses/witness-12-files-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-case/
Jonathon Manalo?
http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/people/witnesses/witness-13-files-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-case/
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)...it is obvious that there was a fight, one person on top. Good saw punch-like motions from the guy on top, clothing matched TM. Others saw two people on the ground, fighting.
Z did have injuries, and they could not have been self-inflicted as he was constantly being watched. Good's 911 call establishes the Manalo arrived with a flashlight within seconds after the shot. Good was watching while he was on the phone to police.
So you are left with TM hitting Z.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)Jon Manalo "arrived with a flashlight within seconds after the shot" and did not see anything before that. When he arrived, Trayvon was DEAD.
Zimmy was not "constantly being watched". How the hell did you come up with that one?
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Listen to his 911 call.
Mrs. Manalo watched after she heard the shots. Manalo had him under flashlight observation about ten seconds after the shot. Surdyka was watching, but she freaked out and went hysterical.
Bedtime. Be back tomorrow, sometime.
nenagh
(1,925 posts)and one foot inside the patio door... That's as close as he got to the scene...
He returned inside to phone 911 so was not there when the shot was fired.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)He describes what is happening. It is obvious that he is still watching the event as it happens.
nenagh
(1,925 posts)I'm still curious about how Zimmerman's nasal swelling disappeared so rapidly.
The Physicians Assistant didn't seem to make much of it, but the Defense's famous ME, i thought he said, that possibly George's nose had been put back into place by the EMT'S or someone at the Station which could account for the rapid loss of swelling.
I don't know whether they thought it might have been broken before and was re fractured..
Maybe again, I'm misremembering. But I do think the rapid loss of swelling is odd..unless he constantly used an ice pack at the police station.
yardwork
(69,364 posts)Good has a serious financial conflict of interest. Also, eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable. I think that Good testified to what he wanted to have seen. He may believe it himself now. Like Zimmerman.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)Zimmerman was the only one with physical evidence to support his version of events and it showed in the result.
yardwork
(69,364 posts)The dead child is the evidence.
The jury agreed that non-black people get to decide when to kill black men. All's right with the world.
I'll tell you one thing. This case made a radical out if me. Add one more person to the list if those who are coming for your guns. I have a new goal in life.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)In case you missed it, most of us were interested in the circumstances that lead the bullet being fired.
Tommy_Carcetti
(44,498 posts)Best exchange of the trial, the prosecution to the defense's medical expert, I'm paraphrasing:
"Someone has a bloody mouth, I cover my hand over it, what do you expect to see on the hand?"
"Blood."
And I'm still waiting to see evidence that someone can have their head bashed into concrete 20-30 times and only come away with two small scratches.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)It is still absence of evidence vs evidence that can be shown to a jury...
As we saw, one sells better than the other...
Tommy_Carcetti
(44,498 posts)And statements like that should have made his theory extremely suspect.
Of course this is all retrospective and in the end, the defense sold his story, but the jury shouldn't have bought it.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)... if the prosecution had had a cogent theory of their own.
Something to balance out the step by step and minute by minute that Zimmerman put forth.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)How about forensics? Both Dr. Bao and Dr. DiMaio said that TM was leaning over Z when the shot was fired.
What financial conflict of interest? At the time of the event Good didn't know Z.
yardwork
(69,364 posts)I'm through arguing with people who want to kill black children.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Thankfully one of the bigger ones was escorted off the site today. Hopefully his buddies will join him.
OwnedByCats
(805 posts)you also understand the other witnesses aren't reliable either, right?
yardwork
(69,364 posts)They don't want to get sued. Strong interest in seeing George acquitted. Also I assume that many of them are as racist as George.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Zimmerman sees Martin as a suspect ... but there was no crime.
Zimmerman gets out of car ... can't be because he is scared.
Zimmerman follows Martin and indicates that these "punks" always get away. Clearly Zimmerman does not want the punk martin to get away.
A confrontation occurs. If we "put all the pieces together" ... who has the motive to start a confrontation?
Is it Martin who is walking home from the store? Or is it Zimmerman, who does not want the punk Martin to get away?
A confrontation occurs. And Zimmerman kills Martin.
The pieces fit. Zimmerman is initiating all of the action through out this event.
Or what one has to believe is that Martin being a thug I guess, attacks Zimmerman for no reason. What motive does Martin have to confront Zimmerman? None.
We know exactly what Zimmerman's motive for starting a confrontation is. He said it to the police. He does not want another one of these punks to get away.
Good arrives after the confrontation is already underway. He knows nothing of the preceding events.
And the punk Martin, did not get away. Mission accomplished for Zimmerman.
Blue_Tires
(57,596 posts)
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)Anyone who believes Zimmerman is completely deranged. The guy lies constantly. Apparently racists will believe anything.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Racist garbage.
Hugabear
(10,340 posts)Your man got away with murder.
Do you need to keep putting Trayvon on trial?
Simply disgusting
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)It's an entirely valid question.
TDale313
(7,822 posts)Did he not have a right to fear death or great bodily harm? Given the outcome and the fact that Zimmerman had a gun, I'd say he did.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)right to live.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)
demmiblue
(39,720 posts)HappyMe
(20,277 posts)Trayvon is still dead and Zippy got away with it.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Asshole got off...
Asshole will fade away
Hopefully some other assholes will think twice before playing cop
Galraedia
(5,331 posts)
How did the fight end approximately 50 feet from where George Zimmerman claims he was punched, fell backwards, and then straddled and punched in the face by Trayvon Martin? The direction is consistent with the direction in which Martin would be going to get back to where he was staying. A witness heard the two arguing and it's almost as if at some point Martin tried running away and was pursued by Zimmerman, which would explain why the body was found about 50 ft from where Zimmerman claims the fight started and around where he lost his keys.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)Probably would have done a better job.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)Your scenario does not fit with their testimony. And they were prosecution witnesses.
Galraedia
(5,331 posts)Says she heard a male definitely yelling help, but it sounded like they were running toward them yelling help.
Mary Cutcher Witness #5
Says she could hear this man say, "What are you doing around here?" and that she could hear the sound of someone running.
Selene Bahadoor Witness #1
Said she heard running from left to right, suggesting that someone was running toward the house where Mr. Martin was staying.
Regardless of whether or not Trayvon punch Zimmerman in the face first, the evidence suggests that at some point he tried to run and was pursued by Zimmerman. All of this fits with Zimmerman's personality. After all, moments before the shooting he said in his 911 call, "These assholes always get away". Zimmerman knew the police were already on the way, Trayvon didn't. Zimmerman wasn't just going to let him go either, especially if he was punched in the face and had a reason to have the 'suspicious' looking kid he followed arrested.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)I am spitting again. I am spitting and snarling!
jezuz.
Captain Stern
(2,253 posts)....based on the case that was presented to them.
However, it's always puzzled me why the prosecution didn't emphasize the fact that Martin's body was found so far from where Zimmerman claims the confrontation happened. Zimmerman claimed Martin hit him, and knocked him to the ground. He doesn't claim they rolled around, or that he got up and ran. He implies that everything happened in one spot.
I think that if the prosecution had made a bigger deal out of this, Zimmerman most likely would have been forced to testify, and in doing so contradict what he said in the video.
yardwork
(69,364 posts)We know that from his 911 call. He told the dispatcher that he wasn't going to let the fucking punk (?) get away.
Zimmerman chased down an unarmed teen and executed him, then put together a bs self defense excuse. Lots of people see right through this and don't care anyway. To the Zimmerman defenders it is right and good for white people to kill black people. The jury agreed.
If you support Zimmerman, then you support the right of white people to decide when black people have to die. Don't lie to yourself.
Rex
(65,616 posts)That's all we really know. SO far that is not a crime. From the evidence, both were facing off when Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. None of this 'who was on top' stuff.
[URL=
.html][IMG]
[/IMG][/URL]
rufus dog
(8,419 posts)The racist profiling piece of shit hit him with a bullet right through the heart.
What an ignorant fucking question.
JI7
(93,617 posts)so i guess this time he was going to make sure that doesn't happen.
rufus dog
(8,419 posts)Seriously, WTF!
Not you but the OP.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)
HipChick
(25,612 posts)I hope he is haunted every night by it..
Mariana
(15,626 posts)He's at peace with himself, and I'm sure he sleeps just fine. And really, from Z's point of view, what's to feel bad about? It was part of God's plan, isn't that what he said? God wanted Trayvon dead, I guess, and Georgie was just helping God out.
Skittles
(171,715 posts)he feels nothing
joshcryer
(62,536 posts)My parents always blamed me.
He often inflicted twice, three times the damage because I would let him pummel me because I knew one returned favor, and pow, he's bruised, and I have a red mark that goes away before the parents get home.
Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)DevonRex
(22,541 posts)and if Trayvon hit first. That would be MY first instinct. Hit back. Right? But not George. Oh, no. Then just reaches back underneath his body, gets his gun, and Trayvon just lets him put that gun right up to his heart and fire it.
See how none of that makes any sense at all? Know what does make sense? George had the gun OUT. Grabbed Trayvon's shirt. Trayvon tries to get away. Maybe ducks down low. They fall down. Trayvon winds up on top because he wants to get away. But George still has his shirt and Trayvon. And Zimmerman fires.
Response to XemaSab (Original post)
Skittles This message was self-deleted by its author.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)... that was protruding from the grass near where Trayvon's body was found.
They were rolling on the grass so Zimmerman could have hit is head on the METAL and Trayvon might not have even known.
Also, Zimmerman's nose could have been hit by his own gun's kick-back when he pulled the trigger.
Just something to think about.
Edited to add...
Also the drawstring on Trayvon's sweatshirt - it was pulled all the way down on one side. That to me sounds like Zimmerman grabbed Trayvon's sweatshirt and pulled on it probably knocking Trayvon to the ground. That could be how the initial assault occurred when Rachel heard Trayvon holler "Get off me, get off me"
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)A 9mm is not a strong cartridge. If Z had fired a .44 Magnum, then I would agree with you.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)The gun recoil thing is insane, as is the sprinklerhead.
I think GZ is guilty of manslaughter and it is a travesty. However,
I don't understand why people need to make stuff up.
THERE WAS A FIGHT. THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF EVIDENCE THAT THERE WAS A FIGHT
Witnesses testified that THEY SAW A FIGHT
I think GZ followed and provoked that fight and is guilty of manslaughter.
However I don't understand why people need to make stuff up to deny one of the few things that there is actually evidence for: THERE WAS A FIGHT
wercal
(1,370 posts)Link?
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)Apparently you missed the words: "It is possible..." and "... could have..."
wercal
(1,370 posts)'METAL sprinkler head...... that was protruding from the grass near where Trayvon's body was found.'
Is there a source that states this place had metal sprinkler heads?
I have to tell you, in my neck of the woods, they are plastic, with a thin film of metal in a recessed space, to diffuse the water.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)So you might want to read it carefully. Any idiot who thinks that because Trayvon did not have any bruises he wasn't hit doesn't understand basic biology. A bullet through the heart will stop any bruises from forming. You disgust me.
stranger81
(2,345 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)rainy
(6,321 posts)And she heard it.
Loki
(3,830 posts)Which one of us has ever had a friend, a son, a husband who has gotten into some altercation at some time in his life who has taken the next step and thrown that punch either out of fear or anger? Now the ultimate arbiter of any fight will be the one with a gun. George Zimmerman instilled enough fear in a young, unarmed man for him to fight back and losing the fist fight, George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin dead. George went out hunting that night, Trayvon went out for Skittles. George Zimmerman is a murderer.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)
chelsea0011
(10,222 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)... is a child murdering vigilante POS and a coward.
spanone
(141,615 posts)
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)Yes!
TheLion
(44 posts)Ans: You mean, with something other than a 9mm hollowpoint?
Mojo Electro
(362 posts)and in watching the public discourse, it's clear that a lot of people have lost their minds over this case. It's a lot of seething, sputtering rage completely devoid of critical thinking. The evidence doesn't fit into some people's version of what they so badly want to have happened. So instead of debating the facts, which may not go their way, they have come off the hinges. For one thing, there is wonton throwing around of the word "racist" which is a very ugly thing to call somebody. The alternate juror that was interviewed predominately discussed the evidence, the timeline, the physical evidence, the layout of the crime scene, etc. and in the comments below he was immediately and with zero justification called a racist. One of many examples.
There's a lot on "Ancient Aliens" being thrown around left and right. "Well there's no proof (x scenario) DIDN'T happen, so that must be what happened!" There are so many hair-brained theories I have heard about this case put forth by erstwhile clear-thinking people. This case has brought out the worst in folks, and it's unfortunate. There's no proof that a meteorite didn't land nearby and a fragment hit Zimmy in the face, doesn't make it the least bit plausible.
I wonder if people are intellectually honest with themselves, do they actually believe from the bottom of their hearts what they say? Do you really believe deep down that the gun recoil hit Zimmy in the face, or that Trayvon did? Do you really, deep down believe that it was Trayvon screaming, or Zimmy? Do you honesty believe that they cops caused Zimmy's injuries with his cooperation, on purpose, to cover for him and for themselves? Do you actually believe Zimmy was a person who was just hell bent on murdering a black kid and finally got the chance on the way home from the grocery store? Let's have some intellectual honesty.
To ask people to take a deep breath and think this one through seems to be too much to ask. The evidence did not support the states case, and that has nothing to do with race.
This was a terrible tragedy, but it is not a civil rights case. That facts don't bear that out, and no mental gymnastics will make it so.
Tommy_Carcetti
(44,498 posts)Here's the bottom line with regards to the law, because I don't think you really know the law, even though you act as you do.
Zimmerman killed Trayvon. That's never been disputed.
On its face, i.e. on a prima facie basis, that's illegal, for one person to kill another person.
In order for it not to be illegal, Zimmerman would have to raise an affirmative defense. In law, an affirmative defense is what I call a "Yes, but...." argument. Yes, I killed him, but it was justified self-defense.
With regards to the burden of proof, the state bears the ultimate burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. However, because the affirmative defense of self-defense is being raised, the defendant would have to put forward a plausible theory of self-defense (it need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt). (At this point, the state could still rebut such a theory by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that self-defense does not actually apply, for example, adequate provocation by the person claiming self-defense. However, the judge, out of fear of reversal, was too afraid to instruct the jury to this respect.)
I honestly believe that Zimmerman's defense team failed to put forward any plausible theory of self-defense. The statements by Zimmerman had too many logical flaws to even consider believing. Why would someone who was running (undisputed) from a strange man chasing him for reasons unknown to him, who then manages to lose that strange man, a minute later decide to double back and ambush the strange man that he had put so much effort into losing? It makes zero sense. And for people claiming it was Trayvon's "bravado" or that he "wanted to teach Zimmerman a lesson", that just is not plausible when it comes to natural human fight v. flight instinctual behavior.
You say: "Do you actually believe Zimmy was a person who was just hell bent on murdering a black kid and finally got the chance on the way home from the grocery store?" Very few people here, if any, have actually claimed that's what happened. That would be First Degree pre-meditated murder, which was never the charge in that case. Research 1st Degree vs. 2nd Degree murder.
And yes, I honestly believe it was Trayvon screaming and not Zimmerman. If a stranger is pointing a gun at me, and there are people in houses nearby that I want to alert, I would scream for help, too. Not to mention that in Zimmerman's story, he was supposedly having his mouth smothered yet we were supposed to believe the clear, consistent unmuffled screams for help were his. (And that story is further inconsistent with the physical evidence due to the lack of blood on Trayvon's hands despite Zimmerman apparently having a bloody nose.)
And I do believe race was an issue in this case. It's undisputed that Zimmerman profiled Trayvon ("It looks like he's up to no good."
And I believe that Trayvon's status as a young black male, and Zimmerman's history of calling police about young black males in his neighborhood he viewed as suspicious, raised this to the level of racial profiling.
I accept the verdict only as being a product of the American jury system. However, while I accept the jury's verdict, I still believe it was wrong, dead wrong.
I hope you are not PPR'd because I honestly would like to hear your response on these matters.
SeaLyons
(3,559 posts)and I agree with every word you wrote.
Mojo Electro
(362 posts)Thank you.
"On its face, i.e. on a prima facie basis, that's illegal, for one person to kill another person."
This is true for the most part, although one could make the semantic distinction that it is illegal to *murder* somebody, not necessarily to kill somebody. The vast majority of the time these are the same, not always. (Self defense, legitimate police use of force, etc)
Interesting point about the affirmative defense. As I understand it, the standard for that is by the preponderance of the evidence, or "clear and convincing evidence". I think the defense easily met that standard.
You said "I honestly believe that Zimmerman's defense team failed to put forward any plausible theory of self-defense."
You and I disagree on that point. For one thing, I think the combination of Zimmy's injuries, Good's testimony, the forensics related to to the gunshot, and the grass stains on Zimmy make clear that Trayvon was on top of him kicking his ass.
Did Trayvon double back, or in some other way take action that indicated he chose to confront Zimmy? For me the phone calls and the timeline say he did. The call ends with Jeantel about the same time that Zimmy tells the operator "He's running" and Zimmy lost sight of him, what looks like about 1 minute later. If you look at the map and overhead view, you can see that had Trayvon just continued heading home, he would have been there in like 30 seconds, if that, even at a brisk walk. He had lost Zimmy and had a huge head start. How did they get into the final altercation if he did not either stop and wait for him or come back? Who hit Zimmerman in the face?
And in fact, several people on DU and other forums have claimed that Zimmy was armed and out roaming just waiting to shoot a black kid. The hyperbole surrounding this case has been outrageous.
"And yes, I honestly believe it was Trayvon screaming and not Zimmerman."
I don't agree. Ask yourself this question: If this were a different case that was not so emotionally heated, when you have 2 people, one is on his back, relatively bloodied and beat up, and another person is straddling him and beating him up, and one of those two was screaming for help, which one is it more likely to be? It makes no sense that somebody on top of another person pounding on them would be also screaming for help, and the other person wouldn't. This is what I mean, if there weren't the supposed racial component to this, no clear-thinking person would even give that a second thought.
I'm not familiar with the term "PPR"... does that mean reported? Why would that happen?
Regards,
Mojo
Tommy_Carcetti
(44,498 posts)Thank you for the civilized response, although it's clear we see things differently.
Regarding the affirmative defense of self-defense, I think the physical and eyewitness testimony only established that there was some sort of physical altercation between the two. It does not prove that Trayvon ambushed Zimmerman, and to me, the only way I can plausibly believe Zimmerman was acting in self-defense is if he was ambushed. Zimmerman's story does claim just that, but the story seems so devoid of logic that I would need corroborating eyewitness testimony (witnessing the ambush itself) just to consider it plausible. There was no such eyewitness testimony regarding an ambush.
The injuries themselves make me believe Zimmerman less, not more. Zimmerman claims his head was bashed into concrete anywhere from 10-30 times. The medical testimony did not support this (not even from his own medical expert). Video evidence of Zimmerman walking around freely shortly thereafter did not support this. Zimmerman refusing emergency room care and MRIs did not support this. Zimmerman claiming he was the one clearly yelling for help during the fight did not support this (knowing that multiple strikes to the head would likely cause some sort of concussion, mild or otherwise). All we had was a bloody nose (and yet no blood transferred onto Trayvon's hand which was supposedly smothering Zimmerman's face, which also casts serious doubt on his account) and two small cuts to the head.
And while it's true the law does not require one to have sustained life threatening injuries to be in reasonable fear for one's life and thus act in self-defense, if Zimmerman's head was not actually being bashed into concrete 10-30 times, what else would have caused him to reasonable fear for his life? Did Trayvon have a gun? No, he didn't have a gun. Did Trayvon have a knife? No, he didn't have a knife. So no gun, no knife, no concrete, what would have actually caused Zimmerman to think his life was in danger where he had to use deadly force above and beyond ordinary hand-to-hand force? The defense never said.
So let's go back to the ambush. I don't think you have the timeline correct. Trayvon's call with Rachel ended at 7:16, I believe about a half minute or so before the 911 calls started coming in and a little less than a minute before the shot was fired. Zimmerman tells dispatch that Trayvon was running around the 7:12 mark. Now, you do raise a point that given the relatively short distance to the house where he was staying, he could have made it home in that approximate 3-4 minute period. However, it's possible that he chose to hide out for a minute or two until he felt the coast was clear. It's also possible that since a) he did not live in the neighborhood and wasn't infinitely familiar with it, b) it was dark outside, c) this was a townhouse community where all the houses looked nearly identical, especially from the back, and d) he was on the dog walk where there were no house numbers, he was trying to make his way back to Retreat View Circle so he could make it to the front door of the home where he was staying. All of these possibilities sound logical. What just doesn't sound logical is him doubling back with the intent to ambush George Zimmerman, a man he did not know and who was chasing him for reasons totally unknown to him, and a man he had just managed to escape. Not only does it not make any sense from a psychological standpoint, but the evidence simply doesn't support it. Remember, phone records establish he was on the phone very shortly before neighbors started hearing the commotion. Why would someone planning an ambush continue to talk on the phone and give away the most important part of an ambush, that being the element of surprise? Why would Trayvon's phone be on the ground, as if it were dropped (consistent with Rachel's testimony), as opposed to being in his pocket, meaning Trayvon had both hands free to launch his attack? In order for Zimmerman to prove he was not the aggressor (and thus entitled to self-defense), he needed to show that he was blindsided by Trayvon, and his story needs to make sense. His story, in light of the evidence, does not make sense. It is not plausible, and at least to me, he failed to show that he would be afforded the protection of the affirmative defense of self-defense.
And while I get that you believe it was Zimmerman's voice crying for help, I don't get that only someone totally blinded by emotion and anger and racial bias would believe it was Trayvon's. Your position assumes everything in Zimmerman's story to be true, while in fact only a small portion of his statements were ever corroborated by some of the witnesses, and flat out contradicted by other witnesses. It's very reasonable to believe that someone who has a gun pointed by him by a complete stranger for unknown reasons might yell for help. While conceding that Zimmerman may have suffered some injuries as a result of a physical altercation with Trayvon, there's nothing that I've seen that's consistent with these injuries being life threatening. Zimmerman's story had serious holes in it, beyond what I mentioned above (the need to get out of the car for an address, that he would have to walk all the way through to the other side of Retreat View Circle to get an address, that he didn't know what street he was on in his own community of 3 streets where he had live for 3 years and acted as watchman, that he decided to tell police not to meet him at his car but instead to give him a call).
His story just never added up for me. It was not even remotely plausible.
As for motives, there may have been a few outliers on here that believe that Zimmerman premeditatedly sought out Trayvon to murder him, the vast majority on here have viewed the case in the view of second degree murder and manslaughter, neither of them requiring proof of premeditation or intent to kill. And it's possible, and I'd argue likely in light of his recorded statements, that Zimmerman got out of his car (while armed) with the intent to detain Trayvon until police arrived but that things deteriorated quickly thereafter. Which does not (or at least should not have) absolve Zimmerman for either 2nd Degree Murder or manslaughter.
Bonx
(2,353 posts)uppityperson
(116,020 posts)Mojo Electro
(362 posts)That still doesn't make it okay to throw that accusation around when it isn't substantiated just because one disagrees with something somebody said.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)First of all, in the Zimmerman trial the judge ruled that the phrase "racial profiling" could not be utter in Court during the trial.
The important thing here to remember is: There are a couple dozen 911 tapes that show that Zimmerman called to report "Black" boys/men that looked suspicious.
Only a couple of tapes were allowed to be played in Court.
There IS evidence that can be used in a 'civil rights violation' trial that has not yet been brought forth.
Tommy_Carcetti
(44,498 posts)So it would be hard to tell.
I personally would have like to have known if there was evidence of Zimmerman having grabbed Trayvon's arm, as if he was trying to detain him with one arm and holding a gun with the other. I am personally convinced that's what happened.
However, Trayvon's arm was clothed, so Zimmerman wouldn't likely have scratched Travyon under such a scenario, and if blood loss stops bruising, that wouldn't have shown up either. So it would be difficult to tell.
Response to XemaSab (Original post)
Tommy_Carcetti This message was self-deleted by its author.
Arkansas Granny
(32,265 posts)kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)We'll never know. Nobody saw that part, and Zimmy certainly lied about it.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)But people here are asserting that there was no fight at all, that Zim just shot TM, then slipped and fell and hit his head, and that the three witnesses who saw the fight were lying.
Really, that is what they are saying in this thread.
Rex
(65,616 posts)to help him restrain the body. Makes no sense, but he did ask for help after killing the kid.
Sancho
(9,205 posts)I think GZ grabbed TM from behind. They slipped on the wet grass. TM HEAD hit GZ's nose and GZ fell back and hit the back of his head on the sidewalk. TM tried to get away (his hoody string was pulled out) while GZ held onto him and his shirt. TM was getting up to run, and GZ pulled his shirt with one hand and shot him with the other.
No blood or DNA or bruises on anyone's hands. It was a headbutt...
Beaverhausen
(24,699 posts) La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)jobycom
(49,038 posts)
Jamastiene
(38,206 posts)George Zimmerman hit Trayvon Martin with a bullet fired from a gun and ended his life.
TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)and Martin reasonably defended himself, wannabe ended up in the disadvantage, panicked and shot.
This is how the two got close enough for a physical conflict.
I can't prove it though and neither did the state.
I think too many are incapable or unwilling to separate what they believe from what is proven and cannot or will not discern the difference between evidence supporting a conclusion and evidence proving one.
I also tend to think folks believe that presumption of innocence is simply not assuming guilt, they cannot or will not think of a subject as innocent, often citing such thinking as blaming the victim/taking away their presumption of innocence (despite the victim not being the one on trial), failing to properly compartmentalize and isolate the situation and prosecutors take full advantage pushing emotion and twisting empathy to get juries to focus on the victim rather than the facts of the case because their job is to win not find truth.