Your pugnaciousness deserves neither my time nor effort. Tired of your schtick. If you want to discuss this anymore, be civil. I don't care but neither do I care to return your personal ugliness. The funeral director can't recognize bruising that wasn't there... The FD said since there was no bruising, Martin could not have been punching Zimmerman or slamming his head. I disagree with that conclusion. Do you understand what I am saying?
We know for pretty certain at least a few other things that might prove relevant upon further investigation: 1. One of the guys had a gun. 2. The other guy didn't. 3. One of the guys killed the other guy with his gun. 4. The other guy is dead. 5. One guy was in pursuit of the other guy. 6. The other guy was walking away from the pursuing guy, then walking faster away from him. 7. The guy with the gun, the guy that was following the other guy while the other guy was walking away from him, is claiming self-defense. 8. The other guy is dead. I don't know if there are enough facts yet to determine which which guy was which in any of these circumstances, but I think one of them was Trayvon Martin and one was George Michael Zimmerman*. And if they can figure out which was which then they could probably figure out who to charge with the killing and who to bury. You have to admit some of these things might come up at trial. If there's reason enough to have a trial. I don't know how the above facts might affect that. I heard one of the guys was claiming self-defense for killing the other guy and that maybe he won't have to argue that defense in court but might just get taken at his word. I don't think Spike Lee should tweet anything though until we find out which of these guys is dead and which one killed him. ** But of far greatest importance: why aren't the conservatives going to town on this guy's name by the way - they love acting like people are suspect or dumb for having names, especially scary or silly ones like Barry or Forbes or Hussein or Willard. Oops. Strike that last one. But "George Michael Zimmerman?" A gay name and a Jewish name in the SAME NAME? And nobody's doing a damn thing about it? I do not get that part at all.
So far we have numerous witnesses who claimed that they heard Martin screaming for help, some of whom the police told to change their story to say it was Zimmerman calling for help. We have the gf who's cell phone records back up that she was on the phone with Martin at the time of the altercation. We have her statements that she heard someone presumably Zimmerman approach Martin and ask what he was doing there. That would be Zimmerman approaching Martin, not Martin ambushing Zimmerman. We have cell phone records to back up the timing of what she said. We have the thirteen year old which is old enough to know what he's seeing. We have the other witness who saw Zimmerman on top of Martin before shooting him. He saw the whole conflict. He saw it from start to finish not just the end. We have the video of Zimmerman after he killed Martin. All of that points to non-life threatening injuries, as well as Zimmerman making the initial contact. I understand that there are different stories of the events put out by Zimmerman, and at least one other witness. It's I don't say that for sure Zimmerman started the fight, and wasn't in any danger at all. Yet you go around stating that Martin assaulted Zimmerman as he was walking back to his car as if it's been proven. I'm posting why there's plenty of reason to doubt it. You can't discount testimony simply because it comes from Martin's gf, or we can also discount Zimmerman's statement of events as well.
You're wasting your time. He has taken the place as the guy with his fingers in his ears humming as loud as possible. Anything of value you say that contradicts him he will twist, deny, or straight up ignore. This guy claims to be moderate yet blames most of this on what Martin did or didn't do. Save your energy.
I also want to point out that from my own experience, pretty much 100% of the time I'm walking down a street alone and another guy is walking down the street alone behind me, obviously following me, I get pretty frigging wigged out. How about you guys? If a guy followed me and when I walked faster he walked faster and I had a chance to beat the hell out of him, I absolutely would. And I would say that that was self-defense. Even if everything Zimmerman says is true, it is not self-defense to aggressively follow a stranger, get your ass kicked and then kill the stranger you were aggressively following.
lol a guy named Trayvon with a cell phone in one hand, who was peacefully talking to his girlfriend while wearing a hoody in rainy/murky conditions viciously attacked a fatter, older Z for no reason and broke Z's nose and made him bleed by banging his head into the cement. But then Z shot him so hard with his self-defense gun that Trayvon flew 20 feet into the air and landed in the grass where he died head down.- the story according to Zimmerman.
You forgot the part where Zimmerman straddled the dead body to make sure that it didn't get up and walk around all suspicious like.
You are so desperately sad. What have I twisted? I haven't denied anything but I have provided alternate plausible explanations to a lot of things. I've ignored nothing. I've answered everything that has been put to me and a lot that hasn't. Mostly I've not allowed you cowboys to convict Zimmerman on scant or distorted evidence. Zimmerman should not be convicted by Spike Lee or the New Black Panther Party. His character should not be allowed to be assassinated by innuendo as has been done by many of you. Time will tell but it's not looking good for your side.
Same here. Reminds me of those dreams where you running from someone , but you're in slow-motion. Martin very likely felt like he was going to have to defend himself when he saw he was being followed.
Most of the 13 YOs testimony was about what he heard, wasn't it? He looked after it was over and saw Trayvon on the ground. How does the police video point to Zimmerman making first contact? And who said anything about life-threatening injuries? Where did this new witness come from-- a month after the event?
Deadly force is justified if you are trying to protect yourself from death or serious bodily harm...in other words, life-threatening injuries. Since Zimmerman used deadly force and is claiming self-defense, then he must have been trying to protect himself from serious bodily harm. However, based on the footage, the injuries (if any) Zimmerman sustained were paltry. And considering the fact that Martin was unarmed, it looks like the situation did not merit deadly force.
That's all you've got? I'm sure you're one of the few riding with Zimmerman to be a troll, but that article is mild to say the least. Exposed? No. If anything, Fox should be "exposed" for framing the story so heavily in Zimmerman's favor. Though, we know that Fox has never been very friendly to minorities, especially with a successful African American president in charge.
I don't know about Florida, but in California serious bodily harm (technically we use GBI or great bodily injury) is not the same thing as life threatening injuries. I believe there have been convictions with a sentencing enhancement for great bodily harm for things like a broken nose, needing stitches, having to wear a finger splint, extensive bruising, 2nd degree burns, a concussion, etc. Clearly, if Zimmerman was struck a blow to the back of the head that caused bleeding and a bloody nose he could have a reasonable fear that an injury like a concussion, a broken nose, or needing stitches was imminent. Again, this is the California application of a different term, but I would guess that Florida would see it much the same way.
I looked up the California rules for GBI. It's determined on a case by case basis and the factors to consider are the severity of the injury, the resulting pain, and/or any required medical care. Based on the footage at the police station, how severe would you rate Zimmerman's injuries? Severe enough that he should fear for his life and use deadly force? Or so minor that you question whether or not they even exist? Think about what you're saying. Using your logic, California terminology, and Florida law, if you commanded your chihuahua to attack me, I'd be within my rights to shoot you to death. Don't you think there's a disconnect somewhere?
Awesome of Fox News to be on top of this whole situation. I mean that a kid was shot to death for no reason and the police f'ed up the investigation isn't nearly as important as how the shooter is covered in the press. Nice job fellas. Keep them honest.
Meanwhile ... http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...cation-expert-reasonable-scientific-certainty Two different voice biometric ID experts say that the screams on the 911 calls were not Zimmerman's, with "scientific certainty", "without a doubt".
Needs more facts (Apologies for quoting myself. I just thought I should stand in for bigtexxx since he finally tucked his tail and fled.)
Yes, I would like to know the names of these so-called "experts" so that I might scrutinize their credentials, their police records, anything sexy they might have ever done and also the funniness of their names. Also, are they half-breed.
