Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (5 Viewers)

[TexanFan02]

Do you honestly think that a 17 yo kid with no history of violence was going to beat zimmerman to death with his bare hands right there on that grassy lawn?

Zimmerman is a lying tool. Hes not that bright but hes sneaky.

Zimmerman must have. From his POV he had no idea who Martin was or what he was capable of.

Don't forget he thought he was older than he was. Except when he was telling the dispatcher how old he was. Oops.

 

[pantherclub]

Do you honestly think that a 17 yo kid with no history of violence was going to beat zimmerman to death with his bare hands right there on that grassy lawn?

Zimmerman is a lying tool. Hes not that bright but hes sneaky.

Zimmerman must have. From his POV he had no idea who Martin was or what he was capable of.

Don't forget he thought he was older than he was. Except when he was telling the dispatcher how old he was. Oops.

Yeah, when you piece everything together Zimmer does seem credible at all.

 

[kentric]

Detectives who questioned George Zimmerman in the days after he fatally shot Trayvon Martin grilled him on his story and said some of his statements were inconsistent, according to video and audio police tapes released Thursday.

http://chronicle.augusta.com/news/2012-06-21/video-shows-zimmerman-recounting-trayvon-martin-shooting-police?v=

In an interrogation at the police station, a detective points out inconsistencies in his story, particularly Zimmerman's claim that Martin confronted him, punched him and slammed his head onto the ground when the teenager had no prior history of violence.

So the argument is that because Trayvon didn't have a prior history of violence that he wouldn't confront Zimmerman? Very weak

Zimmerman claims Martin confronted him after the neighborhood watch leader had given up searching for him and was walking back to his truck. But there doesn't appear to be a place to hide in the area where Zimmerman says Martin suddenly appeared, Hill pointed out.

This may be the most valid argument here, although there's no way of knowing whether Zimmerman was focused on something else to the point where he just didn't notice Trayvon in the dark.

Criminal defense attorney Blaine McChesney, who also is not involved in the case, said he found parts of Zimmerman's re-enactment difficult to envision, such as his account of how he was able to reach for his gun with Martin on top of him. Zimmerman said he got on top of Martin after the shooting to restrain him.

Grasping at straws argument saying someone is on top of you so you can't reach for a gun at your side?

"I also find it strange that Zimmerman would have attempted to use both his arms to hold Martin facedown, re-holstering his firearm, given those circumstances," McChesney said. "Once out from under Martin's alleged attack, it would have been more logical to hold Martin at gunpoint from a few feet away until police arrived."

Zimmerman had just shot someone and may have been in fear of his life. What a rationale person would have done has limited bearing on what actually happened. Perfect world arguments are not always relevant in times of stress

He asked Zimmerman to explain why he doesn't have bruises on his body or broken ribs. The two dozen punches Zimmerman claims he took are "not quiet consistent with your injuries," Sereno said.

Second best argument. Zimmerman was however sporting a broken nose. In Zimmerman's defence, I would argue that there's no way of telling how many punches were blocked versus landed and how many were actually thrown. If Zimmerman was dazed by the first punch or the banging of his head, eight punches may have seemed like twenty.

Martin's parents' attorney Ben Crump couldn't immediately be reached for comment. But Crump said on his Twitter feed, "Everyone should review Zimmerman's objectively written statement in comparison to the 911 tapes which were previously released."

Crump did not elaborate.

Im sure there will be more to come in the next day or 2.

Looks like pretty shoddy detective conjecture or reporting.

 

[kentric]

Do you honestly think that a 17 yo kid with no history of violence was going to beat zimmerman to death with his bare hands right there on that grassy lawn?

Zimmerman is a lying tool. Hes not that bright but hes sneaky.

Zimmerman must have. From his POV he had no idea who Martin was or what he was capable of.

Beat me to it. Guess BK expected Zimmerman to do a background check on Trayvon first.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

Would it be more believable if there was a witness that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman?

 

[pittstownkiller]

Do you honestly think that a 17 yo kid with no history of violence was going to beat zimmerman to death with his bare hands right there on that grassy lawn?

Zimmerman is a lying tool. Hes not that bright but hes sneaky.

Zimmerman must have. From his POV he had no idea who Martin was or what he was capable of.

Don't forget he thought he was older than he was. Except when he was telling the dispatcher how old he was. Oops.

Yeah, when you piece everything together Zimmer does seem credible at all.

I am going to speculate that Zimmerman's lack of credibility at almost any level, is not going to offset that they were in a struggle; I think the very fact of this let's him walk. The fact is Martin does have a wound to his hand, and to say that there should be more injuries is being disingenuous, is probably enough to give reasonable doubt; unless you think Zimmerman stood, raised his weapon, shot Martin, had the gun recoil into his face breaking his nose and knocking him down where he cracked his head on the ground.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

Would it be more believable if there was a witness that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman?

Nope. He would have to say he witnessed him "beating his ###" with repeated blows.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

 

[BigSteelThrill]

The fact is Martin does have a wound to his hand, and to say that there should be more injuries is being disingenuous, is probably enough to give reasonable doubt; unless you think Zimmerman stood, raised his weapon, shot Martin, had the gun recoil into his face breaking his nose and knocking him down where he cracked his head on the ground.

Thats all wrong.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

At worst its more outright lies of a made up story by someone who cold-blooded murdered a teen.At worst, that is.

 

[Witz]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

Would it be more believable if there was a witness that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman?

Nope. He would have to say he witnessed him "beating his ###" with repeated blows.

I'm really hoping one day you are actually able to get one of the straws you continue to grasp at. Must be frustrating to say the least.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

Would it be more believable if there was a witness that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman?

Nope. He would have to say he witnessed him "beating his ###" with repeated blows.

I believe he did say he saw Trayvon hitting Zimmerman..So now what?

 

[pittstownkiller]

The fact is Martin does have a wound to his hand, and to say that there should be more injuries is being disingenuous, is probably enough to give reasonable doubt; unless you think Zimmerman stood, raised his weapon, shot Martin, had the gun recoil into his face breaking his nose and knocking him down where he cracked his head on the ground.

Thats all wrong.

No matter how much you hope for it BST, the prosecution will have no chance of getting a conviction if there is a struggle. To try to create "struggle light" is not going to work.

 

[Witz]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

At worst its more outright lies of a made up story by someone who cold-blooded murdered a teen.At worst, that is.

So you really think he stalked and shot Martin in cold blood (and decided to also be on the phone with the police dispatcher to keep a record of his hunt)? Seriously?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

Would it be more believable if there was a witness that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman?

Nope. He would have to say he witnessed him "beating his ###" with repeated blows.

I believe he did say he saw Trayvon hitting Zimmerman..So now what?

So where are the multiple marks on Zimm and Trayvon?

 

[TexanFan02]

The fact is Martin does have a wound to his hand, and to say that there should be more injuries is being disingenuous, is probably enough to give reasonable doubt; unless you think Zimmerman stood, raised his weapon, shot Martin, had the gun recoil into his face breaking his nose and knocking him down where he cracked his head on the ground.

Thats all wrong.

No matter how much you hope for it BST, the prosecution will have no chance of getting a conviction if there is a struggle. To try to create "struggle light" is not going to work.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

At worst its more outright lies of a made up story by someone who cold-blooded murdered a teen.At worst, that is.

So you really think he stalked and shot Martin in cold blood (and decided to also be on the phone with the police dispatcher to keep a record of his hunt)? Seriously?

Yeah, he is wanna be tough-guy officer.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

At worst its more outright lies of a made up story by someone who cold-blooded murdered a teen.At worst, that is.

I think even you know that isn't the case.. It does the discussion do good to make such assertions..We know there was a physical altercation before the shooting, that pretty much eliminates the "Cold blooded murder" option from the discussion..

Injuries, and eye witness testimony show at the very least, there was mutual participation, if not just Trayvon attacking without a physical threat from Zimmerman.

 

[Witz]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

At worst its more outright lies of a made up story by someone who cold-blooded murdered a teen.At worst, that is.

So you really think he stalked and shot Martin in cold blood (and decided to also be on the phone with the police dispatcher to keep a record of his hunt)? Seriously?

Yeah, he is wanna be tough-guy officer.

I know you don't think that is what happened.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

Would it be more believable if there was a witness that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman?

Nope. He would have to say he witnessed him "beating his ###" with repeated blows.

I believe he did say he saw Trayvon hitting Zimmerman..So now what?

So where are the multiple marks on Zimm and Trayvon?

Zimmerman's nose was broken and he had gashes on the back of his head.. If we're to believe the pictures we've seen, the police reports, and the doctors assessment..Also there are reports of injuries (plural?) to Martins hands in the coroners report..Ok, now what?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

At worst its more outright lies of a made up story by someone who cold-blooded murdered a teen.At worst, that is.

So you really think he stalked and shot Martin in cold blood (and decided to also be on the phone with the police dispatcher to keep a record of his hunt)? Seriously?

Yeah, he is wanna be tough-guy officer.

It doesn't make sense that someone might call the police and give them there location and personal information if they planned on committing "cold-blooded murder".. In order for this to be premeditated wouldn't it be someone you knew and had a grievance with?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

At worst its more outright lies of a made up story by someone who cold-blooded murdered a teen.At worst, that is.

So you really think he stalked and shot Martin in cold blood (and decided to also be on the phone with the police dispatcher to keep a record of his hunt)? Seriously?

Yeah, he is wanna be tough-guy officer.

It doesn't make sense that someone might call the police and give them there location and personal information if they planned on committing "cold-blooded murder".. In order for this to be premeditated wouldn't it be someone you knew and had a grievance with?

Planned? Or perfectly willing. Cold-blooded = emotionless.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Hard to retreat when someone is on top of you beating your ###.

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

At worst its more outright lies of a made up story by someone who cold-blooded murdered a teen.At worst, that is.

So you really think he stalked and shot Martin in cold blood (and decided to also be on the phone with the police dispatcher to keep a record of his hunt)? Seriously?

Yeah, he is wanna be tough-guy officer.

It doesn't make sense that someone might call the police and give them there location and personal information if they planned on committing "cold-blooded murder".. In order for this to be premeditated wouldn't it be someone you knew and had a grievance with?

Planned? Or perfectly willing. Cold-blooded = emotionless.

So you know the whole story to be a lie because of some inconsistencies?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Gonna be unbelievable if Trayvon really has only 1 mark of his hands.

If the prosecution invokes the 'Massachusetts law should take precedence over local law' Zimm is toast.

No, if Zimms (multiple) stories become unbelievable his ability to claim "reasonableness" could be negated.

At worst it could be described as one story with inconsistencies. And the inconsistencies I've seen so far really don't reflect on his ability to defend himself if Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, as his testimony, the injuries, and and eye witness accounts suggest..

At worst its more outright lies of a made up story by someone who cold-blooded murdered a teen.At worst, that is.

So you really think he stalked and shot Martin in cold blood (and decided to also be on the phone with the police dispatcher to keep a record of his hunt)? Seriously?

Yeah, he is wanna be tough-guy officer.

It doesn't make sense that someone might call the police and give them there location and personal information if they planned on committing "cold-blooded murder".. In order for this to be premeditated wouldn't it be someone you knew and had a grievance with?

Planned? Or perfectly willing. Cold-blooded = emotionless.

So you know the whole story to be a lie because of some inconsistencies?

Outright lies.And you started the "at worst" scenario, sorry if it led you somewhere you didnt want to be.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

So you know the whole story to be a lie because of some inconsistencies?

Outright lies.And you started the "at worst" scenario, sorry if it led you somewhere you didnt want to be.

I'm discussing the topic, if I didn't want to be here I wouldn't be discussing it..So, you think his story is an "outright lie"? Where did the injuries come from, and what did the witness actually see then? Some of it had to be true right?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

So you know the whole story to be a lie because of some inconsistencies?

Outright lies.And you started the "at worst" scenario, sorry if it led you somewhere you didnt want to be.

I'm discussing the topic, if I didn't want to be here I wouldn't be discussing it..So, you think his story is an "outright lie"? Where did the injuries come from, and what did the witness actually see then? Some of it had to be true right?

You read my previous post fom yesterday? I stated where the injuries came from.Concluded Trayvon (was scared and) probably did (wrongly) hit him when they were standing up. Zimmerman, in turn, was unreasonable in his defense and (wrongly) shot him.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

So you know the whole story to be a lie because of some inconsistencies?

Outright lies.And you started the "at worst" scenario, sorry if it led you somewhere you didnt want to be.

I'm discussing the topic, if I didn't want to be here I wouldn't be discussing it..So, you think his story is an "outright lie"? Where did the injuries come from, and what did the witness actually see then? Some of it had to be true right?

You read my previous post fom yesterday? I stated where the injuries came from.Concluded Trayvon (was scared and) probably did (wrongly) hit him when they were standing up. Zimmerman, in turn, was unreasonable in his defense and (wrongly) shot him.

Maybe you could expand your outline a bit. I saw that you suggested Zimmerman's head injuries and nose fracture could have all came from one punch. And you said Trayvon then climbed on top of him.. Not sure how you qualify that suggestion, and or how that disqualifies Zimmerman from defending himself legally.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

So you know the whole story to be a lie because of some inconsistencies?

Outright lies.And you started the "at worst" scenario, sorry if it led you somewhere you didnt want to be.

I'm discussing the topic, if I didn't want to be here I wouldn't be discussing it..So, you think his story is an "outright lie"? Where did the injuries come from, and what did the witness actually see then? Some of it had to be true right?

You read my previous post fom yesterday? I stated where the injuries came from.Concluded Trayvon (was scared and) probably did (wrongly) hit him when they were standing up.

Zimmerman, in turn, was unreasonable in his defense and (wrongly) shot him.

Maybe you could expand your outline a bit. I saw that you suggested Zimmerman's head injuries and nose fracture could have all came from one punch. And you said Trayvon then climbed on top of him.. Not sure how you qualify that suggestion, and or how that disqualifies Zimmerman from defending himself legally.

You can legally defend yourself and then unreasonably shoot and kill someone else, thus loosing the self defense claim. .Just as the law stresses, and just as our discussion were awhile ago before all of his lies were brought forth.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

So you know the whole story to be a lie because of some inconsistencies?

Outright lies.And you started the "at worst" scenario, sorry if it led you somewhere you didnt want to be.

I'm discussing the topic, if I didn't want to be here I wouldn't be discussing it..So, you think his story is an "outright lie"? Where did the injuries come from, and what did the witness actually see then? Some of it had to be true right?

You read my previous post fom yesterday? I stated where the injuries came from.Concluded Trayvon (was scared and) probably did (wrongly) hit him when they were standing up.

Zimmerman, in turn, was unreasonable in his defense and (wrongly) shot him.

Maybe you could expand your outline a bit. I saw that you suggested Zimmerman's head injuries and nose fracture could have all came from one punch. And you said Trayvon then climbed on top of him.. Not sure how you qualify that suggestion, and or how that disqualifies Zimmerman from defending himself legally.

You can legally defend yourself and then unreasonably shoot and kill someone else, thus loosing the self defense claim. .Just as the law stresses, and just as our discussion were awhile ago before all of his lies were brought forth.

I think you want to see "Lies".. Bigger, more expansive, and of more a determining factor than they really are.. Ultimately, in the state of Florida, if you believe your life is in danger, or in danger of great physical harm, you're within your rights to use lethal force to defend yourself.. Not sure how your alternate schedule of events disqualifies his ability to legally defend himself..His wife "lied" about how much money they had. I believe this was either motivated by greed or fear. Neither of which is a determining factor in this case. The bond hearing was after the fact.

The inconsistencies in what I saw and read are peripheral in my opinion.. He didn't remember all of the exact details.. The inconsistencies were in what the operator said exactly.. His inconsistencies were no different then the ones in here we here from folks who have listened to and studied the recording multiple times.. He wasn't thinking at the time, I better remember everything this person says, I might be quizzed on it later.. At the time, he was expecting the police to arrive and he would go on with his life like every other time he called the police..

He seems to have trouble remembering exact locations during the encounter, or be able to recall some of the exact details.. If you've ever been in one of these adrenaline charged situations before, things happen faster than you can comprehend some times, and you can generally walk away from something like this missing details.. Some people black out all together when they get into a fight, and have to be told by others afterwards what exactly happened.. Sounds like Zimmerman was taken by surprise by that first punch, dazed and wobbled.. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he couldn't remember how he ended up on the ground in a situation like that.. It's happened to me before, hit from behind by a bouncer as I was leaving a club, next thing I knew, we were being pulled apart.. My friends told me we fought, I don't remember a single detail of it.. Just leaving the bar, then being pulled apart.. He punched me in the back of the head, then instincts took over..

 

[pantherclub]

The fact is Martin does have a wound to his hand, and to say that there should be more injuries is being disingenuous, is probably enough to give reasonable doubt; unless you think Zimmerman stood, raised his weapon, shot Martin, had the gun recoil into his face breaking his nose and knocking him down where he cracked his head on the ground.

Thats all wrong.

No matter how much you hope for it BST, the prosecution will have no chance of getting a conviction if there is a struggle. To try to create "struggle light" is not going to work.

Holy crap dude that is not even remotely true. Thanks for playing though.

 

[kentric]

So you know the whole story to be a lie because of some inconsistencies?

Outright lies.And you started the "at worst" scenario, sorry if it led you somewhere you didnt want to be.

I'm discussing the topic, if I didn't want to be here I wouldn't be discussing it..So, you think his story is an "outright lie"? Where did the injuries come from, and what did the witness actually see then? Some of it had to be true right?

You read my previous post fom yesterday? I stated where the injuries came from.Concluded Trayvon (was scared and) probably did (wrongly) hit him when they were standing up.

Zimmerman, in turn, was unreasonable in his defense and (wrongly) shot him.

Maybe you could expand your outline a bit. I saw that you suggested Zimmerman's head injuries and nose fracture could have all came from one punch. And you said Trayvon then climbed on top of him.. Not sure how you qualify that suggestion, and or how that disqualifies Zimmerman from defending himself legally.

You can legally defend yourself and then unreasonably shoot and kill someone else, thus loosing the self defense claim. .Just as the law stresses, and just as our discussion were awhile ago before all of his lies were brought forth.

At the end of the day, the facts appear that Trayvon (per at least one firm witness) was on top of Zimmerman during an altercation and Trayvon was shot point blank. These facts tend to support the general statements made by Zimmerman. Did he embellish certain aspects of the altercation, personally, I think he did. But the prosecution needs to prove that Zimmerman was not in fear for his life and/or he had an opportunity to walk away (difficult to prove if Trayvon was straddling him). With these requirements, it is going to be very difficult for the prosecution to win over an impartial jury. If I am wrong with my legal interpretation, my appologies.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

I found this post on some forum like ours, i think this guy says what i think most people believe , even i agree with almost all of what he says . It was posted by a black man and he`s very right down the middle, no favorites.

sv 20 hours ago in reply to Sklute

Well, I didn't say that I believe Zimmerman's entire story. I suspect, but of course can't know, that it's at least a bit exaggerated (Martin walking ten feet by the car and turning becomes "circling", e.g.) because of Zimmerman's own fear, by the reality of the current situation he's facing, etc.

As to how the fight began, I don't think it had to begin quite the way he says it did in order for the outline of his narrative to be broadly true - that he felt (his perspective) Martin was acting suspiciously, that he got down and searched for him on foot for a moment after losing sight of him, that they then encountered each other and words were exchanged and Martin swung on him. **That could all very well be true.** [And in fact I don't think that broad-strokes representation is unlikely or unreasonable, nor do I think that Zimmerman is wildly lying; the plausibility of it suggests that he's just dissembling like any scared felony-defendant, maybe only remembering things favorably even.] It could still all be true, and Zimmerman could still be **criminally and morally responsible** for Martin's death, by the standards any ordinary citizen (not some saintly standard) should be held to.

The Zimmerman narrative I summarized in the preceding paragraph could all be true. It doesn't change the fact that from Martin's perspective, it is perfectly reasonable that he felt increasingly threatened. He was a teenager in an unfamiliar neighborhood, being followed in a car and then on foot for no obvious reason by a strange-acting, grown man of not insignificant size, at night, a man who is possibly armed and is possibly also calling the police on him - as a young black hooded teenager at night he must have felt scared by the prospect. Maybe he saw Zimmerman and asked him a perfectly reasonable question, perhaps in a voice tinged with anger that seems justified. Who knows how Zimmerman reacted in that moment, reaching in his own pocket? Who knows if the boy made a foolish decision to escalate or follow any anger he may have felt? Isn't it the role of adults to secure the well-being of children in their vicinity if they are at all able, or at least not to endanger them? I think I'm actually on the same page as TNC here, unless I've been reading him wrong.

This trial will go where it will go. [i'm speaking generally now and no longer responding to your specific comment, Sklute, I don't mean to imply any beliefs on your part that you don't hold.] A lot of the anger went out of me after Zimmerman was arrested because, well, fights go bad every day, the justice system takes over, that's the way things are supposed to work, it isn't perfect but it's far better than lawless injustice. What made me furious before that was the set of societal assumptions about black boys that seemed to all swirl together to not only help lead to his tragic death, but to deny him any semblance of justice afterwards, to smear his name after his death like they did to Patrick Dorismond under Giuliani in NYC a decade and a half or so ago... the way the entire government and large segments of society (directly and by implication of the latter) seemed to be saying to his family, "whatever - we know he was probably up to no good anyway - your boy was worth nothing alive and he's worth nothing dead". That could have been me. That there will be a proper investigation and trial at all is good - it should happen as a matter of routine, whether or not the situation looks like it confirms one or another stereotype, and it shouldn't require the extraordinary outpouring of public outrage that prompted this.

.

 

[kutta]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.

I think we can all agree to the following:

1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.

2. There was a fight

3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).

4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.

Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?

For example:

1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness?

2. What if his teeth were knocked out?

3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?

But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

 

[BustedKnuckles]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.I think we can all agree to the following:1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.2. There was a fight3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?For example:1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness? 2. What if his teeth were knocked out?3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

 

[kutta]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.I think we can all agree to the following:1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.2. There was a fight3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?For example:1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness? 2. What if his teeth were knocked out?3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

I can respect that.What about if he was trying to get Zim's weapon?

 

[jon_mx]

Zimmerman's story has held up better than the lead investigator's. Not too many people can remember every detail exactly as it hapenend when they re-tell a story. So far there is nothing which disproves the essence of Zommerman's story. From all the evidence, I have no doubt that Martin is the one who backtracked, confronted Zimmerman, initiated the physical violence and was in the process of kicking Zimmerman's ###. Zimmerman was probably a d-bag, but that does not mean he gives up the right to defend himself.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.I think we can all agree to the following:1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.2. There was a fight3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?For example:1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness? 2. What if his teeth were knocked out?3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

I can respect that.What about if he was trying to get Zim's weapon?

well that changes everything

 

[pantherclub]

Zimmerman's story has held up better than the lead investigator's. Not too many people can remember every detail exactly as it hapenend when they re-tell a story. So far there is nothing which disproves the essence of Zommerman's story. From all the evidence, I have no doubt that Martin is the one who backtracked, confronted Zimmerman, initiated the physical violence and was in the process of kicking Zimmerman's ###. Zimmerman was probably a d-bag, but that does not mean he gives up the right to defend himself.

less than a day later after you shot someone, dude I am sure you can recall everything

 

[pittstownkiller]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.I think we can all agree to the following:1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.2. There was a fight3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?For example:1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness? 2. What if his teeth were knocked out?3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

An honest answer, which I respect but it is a level that I think most won't live up to. What if Trayvon attacked an undercover police officer, would the officer be justified in shooting?

 

[pittstownkiller]

The fact is Martin does have a wound to his hand, and to say that there should be more injuries is being disingenuous, is probably enough to give reasonable doubt; unless you think Zimmerman stood, raised his weapon, shot Martin, had the gun recoil into his face breaking his nose and knocking him down where he cracked his head on the ground.

Thats all wrong.

No matter how much you hope for it BST, the prosecution will have no chance of getting a conviction if there is a struggle. To try to create "struggle light" is not going to work.

Holy crap dude that is not even remotely true. Thanks for playing though.

You don't think there will be one juror who feels that during a struggle that Zimmerman might of felt in fear for his life; this is called reasonable doubt and I do not see how the prosecution proves that Zimmerman wasn't fearful if there was a scuffle. The wounds on Zimmerman seems to prove to me that Zimmerman wasn't in control of this fight.

 

[TexanFan02]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.I think we can all agree to the following:1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.2. There was a fight3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?For example:1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness? 2. What if his teeth were knocked out?3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

An honest answer, which I respect but it is a level that I think most won't live up to. What if Trayvon attacked an undercover police officer, would the officer be justified in shooting?

An undercover police officer could have handled a 17 year old without shooting him. So could Zimmerman.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.I think we can all agree to the following:1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.2. There was a fight3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?For example:1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness? 2. What if his teeth were knocked out?3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

An honest answer, which I respect but it is a level that I think most won't live up to. What if Trayvon attacked an undercover police officer, would the officer be justified in shooting?

well from what ive read zimmy never identified himself , im sure a cop would have before it escalated. My guess is treyvon was as scared before the fight as zimmerman became during the fight.

 

[Mark Davis]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.

I think we can all agree to the following:

1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.

2. There was a fight

3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).

4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.

Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?

For example:

1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness?

2. What if his teeth were knocked out?

3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?

But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

An honest answer, which I respect but it is a level that I think most won't live up to. What if Trayvon attacked an undercover police officer, would the officer be justified in shooting?

An undercover police officer could have handled a 17 year old without shooting him. So could Zimmerman.

Obviously he couldn't or he wouldn't have had a busted up nose and head.

 

[pittstownkiller]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.I think we can all agree to the following:1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.2. There was a fight3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?For example:1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness? 2. What if his teeth were knocked out?3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

An honest answer, which I respect but it is a level that I think most won't live up to. What if Trayvon attacked an undercover police officer, would the officer be justified in shooting?

An undercover police officer could have handled a 17 year old without shooting him. So could Zimmerman.

Not the question.

 

[pittstownkiller]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.I think we can all agree to the following:1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.2. There was a fight3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?For example:1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness? 2. What if his teeth were knocked out?3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

An honest answer, which I respect but it is a level that I think most won't live up to. What if Trayvon attacked an undercover police officer, would the officer be justified in shooting?

well from what ive read zimmy never identified himself , im sure a cop would have before it escalated. My guess is treyvon was as scared before the fight as zimmerman became during the fight.

That is exactly what I thought happened but that fear in Zimmerman is going to be the deciding factor here, not what he could of done differently.

 

[BroadwayG]

My guess is treyvon was as scared before the fight as zimmerman became during the fight.

Why the heck didn't he just go home then?

 

[timschochet]

My guess is treyvon was as scared before the fight as zimmerman became during the fight.

Why the heck didn't he just go home then?

Good question. Perhaps he didn't have the opportunity.

 

[TexanFan02]

A question for the "pro-Trayvon" folks. What would Trayvon have had to do for you to think Zim shot him in self defense.I think we can all agree to the following:1. Something happened before a fight - we are not sure exactly who stalked whom, or exactly what happened. For the sake of this question, let's not worry about that.2. There was a fight3. At one point in the fight, Trayvon was on top of Zim (I think this is agreed upon by most people).4. Zim had bruising on his face (maybe a broken nose, but I'm not totally sure about that) and cuts on the back of his head.Given the scenario above and looking at 2, 3, and 4, if you agree with that, then is there ANYTHING that could have happened where you would say that Zim was justified in shooting him?For example:1. What if Zim's head was completely cracked open and he was losing consciousness? 2. What if his teeth were knocked out?3. What if he was being strangled with two hands around his throat?But I'm really asking for you to tell me what it would take for you to say, "OK, Zim was justified in shooting him."

me personally, it would take treyvon to have a weapon other than his hands.

An honest answer, which I respect but it is a level that I think most won't live up to. What if Trayvon attacked an undercover police officer, would the officer be justified in shooting?

An undercover police officer could have handled a 17 year old without shooting him. So could Zimmerman.

Not the question.

No.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

My guess is treyvon was as scared before the fight as zimmerman became during the fight.

Why the heck didn't he just go home then?

Good question. Perhaps he didn't have the opportunity.

If he was alive he could tell us. I have said way back in this thread that perhaps he didnt want to lead zimmy to his house if he was being followed? Who knows for sure. After seeing the size of the complex this took place at im not so sure he wasnt going home. Zimmy himself said treyvon was walking very slowly , so matbe he was taking his time as he was talking to his GF on the phone , not knowing that zimmy was on his way to look for him.One think lead to another and fate landed them face to face.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Zimmerman's story has held up better than the lead investigator's. Not too many people can remember every detail exactly as it hapenend when they re-tell a story. So far there is nothing which disproves the essence of Zommerman's story. From all the evidence, I have no doubt that Martin is the one who backtracked, confronted Zimmerman, initiated the physical violence and was in the process of kicking Zimmerman's ###. Zimmerman was probably a d-bag, but that does not mean he gives up the right to defend himself.

Very true.. I've had that happen to me immediately after fights.. I couldn't tell you all the exact details, because instinct takes over and it's purely "get them before they get me".. Very plausible that he wouldn't remember all the details.. Actually I bet there is a better chance someone would be missing detail than wouldn't..