The Media's Bias and Race Baiting - Trayvon Martin

blah blah blah blah blah ... In America we are innocent until proven guilty .The prosecution failed to meet it's burden,therefore he retains his innocence.There is no other way to interpret that.


Zimmermens story matches the testimony of of the dispatcher to a T . Tired of hearing all this crap about "following" You can't technically follow someone when you don't know where they are .. the dispatcher asked zimmerman " which way he went " only logical that someone would walk the short distance and look down the various paths . Most of the martin supporters conclusions come from speculation and what they believe was in zimmermans heart . He sounds calm and collected in the phone call and basically followed the advice of the dispatcher,hardly sounds like some vigilante bent on teaching a lesson . Martin was practically home and made the choice to come back and have a confrontation . Witness testimony supports zimmermens claims as to what happened next .

 

I don't guess I've taken a safety course but could you show me this in any material ? My instincts would tell me to get inside and immediately call 911.

Also the evidence shows that martin had lost zimmermen when he ran . Does this safety course say anything about coming back after you've lost the tail and performing some whoop ass ?

 

He nicely posted the testimony of the dispatcher for you.

 

Martin didn't know that he'd lost GZ.

The reason you don't go home is that whoever is following you will then have access to get inside your home while you are getting inside. If you have family and loved ones there they will be in danger. If you are alone then you are inside alone with the follower.

Here's something I found online about it.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/19788.pdf

This is from a university safety advice.
http://www.kent.edu/housing/parentsguide/keepingsafe.cfm

The evidence from the trial shows that Zimmerman was the first to approach Martin and ask him what he was doing there or something close to that.

 

Comparing Florida "Stand your ground" to South Africa's "Apartheid" is a new low, even for one of the greatest race batters of all time Jesse Jackson.

He can disagree with the law all he likes and lobby to change it even, but to compare it to South African Apartheid is the definition of ridiculous.

--------------------

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/wa...ackson-boycott-florida-over-stand-your-ground

 

So from the documents you posted is it safe to assume you believe TM thought GZ was going to rape him?

All would have been fine if TM had followed any of this advice.

 

The discussion was not about what the testimony was. The discussion is about what the jurors thought and believed about that testimony. Unless you are psychic or have spoken to the jurors, you don't know what testimony they valued and that which they did not.

It is certainly plausible that they heard the testimony of the dispatcher it felt that he was trying to cover his ass in his testimony. Maybe they didn't. My point is that you cannot know that. It is certainly plausible that they felt that way, but still found that the prosecution had not met its burden of proof regarding all elements of the offense.

 

Complete speculation

I'd heard the part about driving to a safe place,police station etc but on foot I'd say to get inside ,especially if you're a kid ,anyway he didn't seem to be following any of that advice .

huh ? The only evidence is in zimmermens statements to police and in interviews .. He said he was walking back towards his truck and martin appeared and asked " you got a problem " and "you do now" . Don't know what evidence you are talking about ? That's the one part of it that no one except zimmerman will ever know the truth of ,if he's lying .

 

What are you even still arguing about again?

Please remind me.

The neighborhood has every reason to be suspicious of strangers loitering around given the string of theft and vandalism incidents at the time.

There are no evidence that suggest Zimmerman is some hardcore racist given his past history and the fact that he did not mention Martin's race until the dispatcher asked for it.

Martin was clearly the more physically fit one and he clearly assaulted Zimmerman at some point.

The bottom line is Zimmerman lawfully approached Martin and was beaten. Which part of this are you trying to deny?

 

You've lost this debate so badly that you've resorted to ridiculous rat hole arguments......

Did you forget it was the Prosecutor who was questioning him and the Prosecutor didn't argue the point that he was not a cop and that do not follow was a suggestion. You would have to be a complete moron to think the jury would dispute testimony that the Prosecution and Defense found no issue with.

 

You left out the failed strategy TM actually employed Stop, get the Drop and Roll a joint. 2 out of 3

 

I think that the jury probably did give weight to that testimony, but I am not presumptuous enough to just assume what was in the minds of six strangers. Likewise, I am not simpleminded enough to read something into a verdict other than what it actually means legally.

 

I bet you're naive and have no idea what you're talking about. I dont see how somebody with a different ethnicity can tell some one else what still goes on and what doesnt. White girls been loving black men (sarah palin) lol.. They just more open about it now a days.

 

I'm responding to posts. I'm not arguing anything at all. I'm just presenting facts. Sometimes people misrepresent facts, or state things that are their assumptions as fact.

Just look at Granville's post. We know that pot can stay in the system for weeks, yet Granville is and has been very interested in trying to tarnish TM. So he adds in a comment about TM stopping and rolling a joint? Nobody has said that TM smoked mar1juana that night. Even if he did, what does that have to do with anything? Granville made the assumption that Martin smoked a joint that night. It isn't fact.

As for my post, it was response to giddy bringing up something and making a claim. I responded. I'm not putting forth new arguments here, just responding to other people's posts.

 

The evidence is also from the person who was on the phone with TM at the time of the incident. She testified what she heard, and according to that witness Zimmerman was the first to initiate verbal contact.

I'm well aware that GZ has claimed that Martin spoke like a 90's action movie villain. His statement is some kind of evidence, but there is other evidence as well.

 

He's not comparing Florida to South Africa. He's comparing the power of boycotting to bring about change.

 

The numbers say otherwise. Less than 1% of white women are in interracial marriages with black men (roughly 5% vice versa) and these marriages were twice as likely to end in divorce. If we also include cohabitation and other non-marriage relationships, at most the figure would still be miniscule. You're either watching too much p*rn or have serious delusions.

 

Despite the black woman juror recanting her not guilty ruling in the Zimmerman trial (and IMO she did this to protect herself and her eight children from the animus of the black/liberal community), there is a serious precedent being set.

If the government can go after Zimmerman despite being found not guilty, do Eric Holder et al, once they are out of office, wonder whether political enemies will keep charging them with crimes until convictions are achieved? Indeed, that is the precedent Obama ... er, Holder ... is setting.

 

So outside of a courtroom, is it okay for us to say that George Zimmerman is INNOCENT if murdering Trayvon Martin in the the second degree?

I think not by some. It keeps getting corrected every time it is said by some others... even though we are not in a courtroom!

 

I listened to the entire ~40 minutes. The dispatcher was alarmed by NOTHING that Zimmerman said. He detected no racism or no anger whatsoever.