Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (1 Viewer)

[pittstownkiller]

You boys, and your flimsy conclusions, should read Camus.

Are you suggesting the story where it is basically OK to kill some people as long as your behavior otherwise conforms to societies expectations?

I would suggest the attempt by the prosecutor, Martin's family attorney, and the media, to make Zimmerman into a monster instead of trying him on the facts of this particular case. You have people like Tim (et al.), justifying an unsubstantiated leap to guilt based on character assassination.

So what fact am I missing. Mr. Zimmerman killed Mr. Martin who was unarmed and was not bothering anyone until Mr. Zimmerman, got into his business. Then Mr. Zimmerman and Mr. Martin got into a fight when Mr. Zimmerman shot Mr. Martin. So yes Mr. Zimmerman should have to go to court to defend his actions. Not saying he is quilty or not quilty.. but Mr. Martin deserves to have the truth told !

Well your timeline is completely out of sequence, which I do not know if it was done to make a point, but I agree completely with your last two sentences. Mr. Zimmerman is the one on trial and should be innocent until proven otherwise and not tried in the court of public opinion to the level that he cannot receive a fair trial.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

I think they are using that as a premeditation.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

I think they are using that as a premeditation.

Oy vey, M1 isn't even on the table and premed. has nothing to do with M2. So people think you have this guy driving around in his car with a loaded gun looking for black people to shoot? I know the guy had problems but that is quite a leap to make.

 

[timschochet]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

First off, I have no "crowd". The answer to the bolded, as I've stated several times, is no. I bring up racial profiling mostly because of the vehemence with which certain people here want to deny that it took place, or ever takes place. I find their refusal to acknowledge that we continue to live in a society in which racism remains prevalent and institutionalized within law enforcement as highly problematic. But does this fact specifically determine the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman? Absolutely not. Compared to what actually happened during the confrontation, it has only peripheral bearing.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

First off, I have no "crowd". The answer to the bolded, as I've stated several times, is no. I bring up racial profiling mostly because of the vehemence with which certain people here want to deny that it took place, or ever takes place. I find their refusal to acknowledge that we continue to live in a society in which racism remains prevalent and institutionalized within law enforcement as highly problematic. But does this fact specifically determine the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman? Absolutely not. Compared to what actually happened during the confrontation, it has only peripheral bearing.

My point is nobody knows if it took place, compared to your view that it clearly did. My second point is even if it did take place it does not excuse Martin's actions. Absent Zimmerman chasing down, tackling Martin and begin to take swings at him, the Martin defense-camp doesn't have a leg to stand on IMO.

 

[timschochet]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

First off, I have no "crowd". The answer to the bolded, as I've stated several times, is no. I bring up racial profiling mostly because of the vehemence with which certain people here want to deny that it took place, or ever takes place. I find their refusal to acknowledge that we continue to live in a society in which racism remains prevalent and institutionalized within law enforcement as highly problematic. But does this fact specifically determine the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman? Absolutely not. Compared to what actually happened during the confrontation, it has only peripheral bearing.

My point is nobody knows if it took place, compared to your view that it clearly did. My second point is even if it did take place it does not excuse Martin's actions. Absent Zimmerman chasing down, tackling Martin and begin to take swings at him, the Martin defense-camp doesn't have a leg to stand on IMO.

We don't know what Martin's actions were. You seem to be implying here that Martin deserved to die.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

First off, I have no "crowd". The answer to the bolded, as I've stated several times, is no. I bring up racial profiling mostly because of the vehemence with which certain people here want to deny that it took place, or ever takes place. I find their refusal to acknowledge that we continue to live in a society in which racism remains prevalent and institutionalized within law enforcement as highly problematic. But does this fact specifically determine the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman? Absolutely not. Compared to what actually happened during the confrontation, it has only peripheral bearing.

My point is nobody knows if it took place, compared to your view that it clearly did. My second point is even if it did take place it does not excuse Martin's actions. Absent Zimmerman chasing down, tackling Martin and begin to take swings at him, the Martin defense-camp doesn't have a leg to stand on IMO.

We don't know what Martin's actions were. You seem to be implying here that Martin deserved to die.

Tim, why don't you just tell us what you THINK happened. You have made it very clear in this thread that you think Zimmerman is guilty of murder even though you cannot prove it in a courtroom which I am fine with. Tell us your version of the events where you come to the conclusion that Zimmerman is guilty of murder.ETA: I don't want to hear about any of the testimonies or other such "evidence", in layman's terms just tell us what you think really went down. I'm not looking for your bullet list that you already posted unless you explain the injuries that Zimmerman sustained.

 

[TexanFan02]

Witness 9 is George's cousin. Sorry, but this is funny, molestation, playing doctor for a decade, whatever. It doesn't sound like they ever had intercourse, just played around a lot and when she became of age to realize she'd been had... well, there's money to made on her pervert cousin now.

Witness 9 told prosecutors the molestation began when she and Zimmerman were young children. Her parents were moving to another state and she and her sister were sent to stay with Zimmerman’s family in Virginia.

“We would all lay in front of the TV” to watch movies, she said, “and he would reach under the blankets and try to do things. … I would try to push him off, but he was bigger and stronger and older,” she said.

He touched her improperly, she said, and at least once, when she was 12, forced her to touch him.

The last sexual encounter, she said, happened when she visited Zimmerman’s family in Lake Mary. He directed her to lay on a bed and began to massage her, she said.

“I just got up and I ran out of the house and I got in my car,” she said, adding that Zimmerman “only chased me to the front door.”

She and her parents eventually confronted Zimmerman at an Orlando-area restaurant, she said. Zimmerman said he was sorry and left, she said.

See the pattern? He only chased her to the front door, just like he only chased Trayvon a few yards towards the sidewalk. This witness confirms how silly is the notion obese George could chase down Trayvon.

would you be so glib if this was your own daughter?

From what I can tell from her statement so far? Yeah, I would probably laugh this stuff off. I'm not insensitive to sexual abuse within family units, but her story isn't moving me beyond a little sympathy and pity. I'm pretty much done reading media articles on this case. They sensationalize everything. Some busted knuckleheads get suckered into that stuff. It sounds like George was attracted to her and she let him get away with some stuff. Years later she ran for the door when he talked her into a massage. She did take him up on his invitation to spend the night at his house alone, drove herself to the home of the person she claims to have feared so much, and she did comply with his request to lie down on the bed for a massage. Pretty normal stuff, not what I consider when I hear the word molestation. It's not close to some media outlets that made it seem like an adult George molested a 6 year old. According to her the 6-7 year old stuff happened watching tv in a room with her parents! But since he was older and stronger she couldn't push him off... in front of their parents? I am reading what she said happened, not the media spin. I do hope the state brings sexual assault charges though. That would be fun. This is going to hurt the defense donation drives. She should have just blackmailed them.

Of note Timmah, she says she never heard or witnessed George say or do anything racist. How did the media miss that!? Her accusations appear to be directed towards his family, particularly George's Peruvian mother with black genes in her near family tree. She of brown and black descent insisted her kids marry white to improve their place in society, like she did. And she hates Obama. She's a bigot like my mom.

This cuz witness #9 practically begged investigators to dig into George's possible racism based on the influence of the evil Peruvian. She was sure they would find it if they spoke to enough people who knew him. A dozen federal agents took her advice and came up with nada.

Also Lester has asked the state to limit future discovery to relevant material. And I was wrong earlier stating this witness was the same as the one George was pursuing for an affair. That would be the ex fiancee that shared dual restraining orders with George 7 years ago.

The Cure rules.

Huh. Really? Wait for the Wagist, I guess. They only report pro Zimmerman stuff, so it won't be pure.

Huh? I just listened to her two statements. That's the best way to know what's real or not at this point. Same reason I posted the notorized motion to dismiss and bond order straight from the judge and attorneys. The articles spun from those two docs are ridiculous. Stick to the source material.

I never read Wagist. I read the Treepers for wingnut humor, JusticeQuest for unhinged liberal moonbattery, and TalkLeft for common sense. This thread is so far behind those places it can never catch up. I've bookmarked a couple blogs where lawyers are posting or commenting like the two you read this morning. Why is wagist even mentioned? The Treepers is the place for Zimmerman love. Man that place is delusional but no one is following the story closer.

Because it's where you got your whole "Timeline theory" from, and harped on it for months? That's my guess.

Wrong. My timeline theory was originally mine. Btw, it still holds up so well, that at rational TalkLeft it is the basis of discussion. I just became curious about it in late March because things didn't make sense when they released the phone calls. I tried to reconstruct it but found others way ahead of me. I never referred to Wagist, that was fatness or someone coming unhinged because he/she found that site promoting similar ideas as me. The timeline stuff was just common sense and easy to find if you looked. Wagist, btw, really missed one of the keys to attacking Trayvon because the authors don't know their gangsta slang. I got my early timelines from JusticeQuest forums, btw, a very very Trayvonite site.

Dude. You posted the whole thing from the Wagist site and acted like it was gospel. Don't make me dig it up. Doesn't matter at this point anyway, Zimmerman is a proven liar.

No, fatness (and maybe you too) accused me of that, but it never happened. I think it was ATC1 who posted from Wagist and I told him their map was weak.

Oops, that's correct. Then Fatness accused you of relying on it, since you weren't really saying where you were getting your info. It's been a long thread.

 

[timschochet]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

First off, I have no "crowd". The answer to the bolded, as I've stated several times, is no. I bring up racial profiling mostly because of the vehemence with which certain people here want to deny that it took place, or ever takes place. I find their refusal to acknowledge that we continue to live in a society in which racism remains prevalent and institutionalized within law enforcement as highly problematic. But does this fact specifically determine the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman? Absolutely not. Compared to what actually happened during the confrontation, it has only peripheral bearing.

My point is nobody knows if it took place, compared to your view that it clearly did. My second point is even if it did take place it does not excuse Martin's actions. Absent Zimmerman chasing down, tackling Martin and begin to take swings at him, the Martin defense-camp doesn't have a leg to stand on IMO.

We don't know what Martin's actions were. You seem to be implying here that Martin deserved to die.

Tim, why don't you just tell us what you THINK happened. You have made it very clear in this thread that you think Zimmerman is guilty of murder even though you cannot prove it in a courtroom which I am fine with. Tell us your version of the events where you come to the conclusion that Zimmerman is guilty of murder.ETA: I don't want to hear about any of the testimonies or other such "evidence", in layman's terms just tell us what you think really went down. I'm not looking for your bullet list that you already posted unless you explain the injuries that Zimmerman sustained.

I've done so several times. What I think happened is this: Zimmerman confronted Martin, was accusing and rude, and Martin decided to beat the crap out of him. Zimmerman got angry that he was being beaten down by a skinny black punk whom he probably thought he could take, and in a fit of rage pulled out the gun and shot Martin to death. At no time did Zimmerman truly fear for his life. He was just pissed off that he was losing. That's what I think happened. Can it be proven with evidence in court? Extremely unlikely. I hope so, though.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Does a proper self-defense plea require that Zimmerman fears for his life?

How much bodily harm would you be willing to take before shhoting someone?

If its true through the beat down you are taking that your weapon becomes exposed wouldn't you gear that Martin would take it and use it against you?

I assume you think Z is lying about M verbally threatening his life, if it was true does that change your stance?

 

[timschochet]

Does a proper self-defense plea require that Zimmerman fears for his life?How much bodily harm would you be willing to take before shhoting someone?If its true through the beat down you are taking that your weapon becomes exposed wouldn't you gear that Martin would take it and use it against you?I assume you think Z is lying about M verbally threatening his life, if it was true does that change your stance?

1. I don't know what the exact law says about this. In my mind, if Zimmerman did not fear for his life, then he murdered Trayvon Martin. But I am not the law.2. I don't know. I've never been in that situation. 3. Certainly, IF Martin saw the weapon and there was a struggle for it. That is all surmise, however. 4. Yes, I think Zimmerman is lying about what Martin said. If Martin actually said that, and Zimmerman believed it, then it was justifiable homicide. But I don't believe that's what happened.

 

[Clifford]

So almost 300 pages later and I am still basically 100% correct in the conclusions I completely jumped to.

Are you talking about the ones where you accused anyone who didn't rush to judgment like you as being a member of Storm Front?

Yep. BTW, nice selective editing.

Do you mean the part where you've now concluded he wasn't acting in self-defense even though you don't know all of the facts?

link?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

and not tried in the court of public opinion to the level that he cannot receive a fair trial.

Everyone is tried in the court of public opinion. Take OJ for example. Judicial court said one thing, public opinion said another.

 

[Clifford]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

First off, I have no "crowd". The answer to the bolded, as I've stated several times, is no. I bring up racial profiling mostly because of the vehemence with which certain people here want to deny that it took place, or ever takes place. I find their refusal to acknowledge that we continue to live in a society in which racism remains prevalent and institutionalized within law enforcement as highly problematic. But does this fact specifically determine the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman? Absolutely not. Compared to what actually happened during the confrontation, it has only peripheral bearing.

My point is nobody knows if it took place, compared to your view that it clearly did. My second point is even if it did take place it does not excuse Martin's actions. Absent Zimmerman chasing down, tackling Martin and begin to take swings at him, the Martin defense-camp doesn't have a leg to stand on IMO.

Personally I don't think getting beat up for following someone give you the right to kill that person. But hey, that's the society the NRA carefully built by buying politicians, so here we are.

 

[Clifford]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

First off, I have no "crowd". The answer to the bolded, as I've stated several times, is no. I bring up racial profiling mostly because of the vehemence with which certain people here want to deny that it took place, or ever takes place. I find their refusal to acknowledge that we continue to live in a society in which racism remains prevalent and institutionalized within law enforcement as highly problematic. But does this fact specifically determine the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman? Absolutely not. Compared to what actually happened during the confrontation, it has only peripheral bearing.

My point is nobody knows if it took place, compared to your view that it clearly did. My second point is even if it did take place it does not excuse Martin's actions. Absent Zimmerman chasing down, tackling Martin and begin to take swings at him, the Martin defense-camp doesn't have a leg to stand on IMO.

We don't know what Martin's actions were. You seem to be implying here that Martin deserved to die.

Tim, why don't you just tell us what you THINK happened. You have made it very clear in this thread that you think Zimmerman is guilty of murder even though you cannot prove it in a courtroom which I am fine with. Tell us your version of the events where you come to the conclusion that Zimmerman is guilty of murder.ETA: I don't want to hear about any of the testimonies or other such "evidence", in layman's terms just tell us what you think really went down. I'm not looking for your bullet list that you already posted unless you explain the injuries that Zimmerman sustained.

I've done so several times. What I think happened is this: Zimmerman confronted Martin, was accusing and rude, and Martin decided to beat the crap out of him. Zimmerman got angry that he was being beaten down by a skinny black punk whom he probably thought he could take, and in a fit of rage pulled out the gun and shot Martin to death. At no time did Zimmerman truly fear for his life. He was just pissed off that he was losing. That's what I think happened. Can it be proven with evidence in court? Extremely unlikely. I hope so, though.

Can't be disproven either. All we have in this case is Zimm's word and various conflicting testimony from the neighbors and Zim's wounds. If getting your head scraped in a fight allows you to kill someone legally in Florida, Zim wins. If it comes down to having to trust Zim's word to find him not guilty, he's in increasingly deep #### as he appears to have some serious issues with both the truth, races, and normal human behavior.

 

[jon_mx]

Even in Tim's version, Martin initiates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Even in Tim's version, Martin imitates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

Because reasonable actions have to be maintained to use self-defense (or one of its clauses).

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Does a proper self-defense plea require that Zimmerman fears for his life?How much bodily harm would you be willing to take before shhoting someone?If its true through the beat down you are taking that your weapon becomes exposed wouldn't you gear that Martin would take it and use it against you?I assume you think Z is lying about M verbally threatening his life, if it was true does that change your stance?

1. I don't know what the exact law says about this. In my mind, if Zimmerman did not fear for his life, then he murdered Trayvon Martin. But I am not the law.2. I don't know. I've never been in that situation. 3. Certainly, IF Martin saw the weapon and there was a struggle for it. That is all surmise, however. 4. Yes, I think Zimmerman is lying about what Martin said. If Martin actually said that, and Zimmerman believed it, then it was justifiable homicide. But I don't believe that's what happened.

I guess the picture I am trying to paint is, you'd have to discredit everything Zimmerman has said, not half of it or parts of it. In my mind you only need a few pieces to be true and then there is no question it was self defense. First and foremost his injuries: two blackeyes, a broken nose and cuts on the back of your head - unless you think any of that is self-inflicted or you think Zimmerman physically started the altercation to such an extent that gave Martin the right to inflict those injuries, I know if I was Zimmerman you get to a point where you have to be concerned about getting knocked unconscious - I am not OK letting that go down if I have a gun.If the gun is exposed as well - if I am not in control, i.e. someone is on top of me and my weapon is exposed and I think there's a chance he sees it, I am going for it, I'm not thinking about it, I'm going for it and using it.You can pick that apart all you want with not knowing for sure what happened, not having certified medical records corroborating a broken nose, etc...but without significant evidence to refute that it's good enough for me.

 

[timschochet]

Does a proper self-defense plea require that Zimmerman fears for his life?How much bodily harm would you be willing to take before shhoting someone?If its true through the beat down you are taking that your weapon becomes exposed wouldn't you gear that Martin would take it and use it against you?I assume you think Z is lying about M verbally threatening his life, if it was true does that change your stance?

1. I don't know what the exact law says about this. In my mind, if Zimmerman did not fear for his life, then he murdered Trayvon Martin. But I am not the law.2. I don't know. I've never been in that situation. 3. Certainly, IF Martin saw the weapon and there was a struggle for it. That is all surmise, however. 4. Yes, I think Zimmerman is lying about what Martin said. If Martin actually said that, and Zimmerman believed it, then it was justifiable homicide. But I don't believe that's what happened.

I guess the picture I am trying to paint is, you'd have to discredit everything Zimmerman has said, not half of it or parts of it. In my mind you only need a few pieces to be true and then there is no question it was self defense. First and foremost his injuries: two blackeyes, a broken nose and cuts on the back of your head - unless you think any of that is self-inflicted or you think Zimmerman physically started the altercation to such an extent that gave Martin the right to inflict those injuries, I know if I was Zimmerman you get to a point where you have to be concerned about getting knocked unconscious - I am not OK letting that go down if I have a gun.If the gun is exposed as well - if I am not in control, i.e. someone is on top of me and my weapon is exposed and I think there's a chance he sees it, I am going for it, I'm not thinking about it, I'm going for it and using it.You can pick that apart all you want with not knowing for sure what happened, not having certified medical records corroborating a broken nose, etc...but without significant evidence to refute that it's good enough for me.

First off, I do discredit nearly everything Zimmerman has said. Why shouldn't I? He has shown himself, at the very least, to be a liar. (And no, I don't want to get into legalistic arguments about whether or not Zimmerman lied or his wife lied or whatever; this is not a court of law, and I think that any reasonable person can determine that we're not dealing with an honest guy here.)Now the question you raise is an interesting one: are the cuts to the back of the head, along with the broken nose, sufficient evidence for a reasonable person to conclude that Zimmerman feared for his life? Obviously I don't think so. The doctor who saw Zimmerman the next day testified that these weren't serious injuries, and certainly Zimmerman didn't ever seem to regard them as serious, based on his actions immediately after the shooting and his actions the next day. But I can see how you might disagree with this. Certainly, in terms of a legal case, the onus is going to be on the prosecution to prove somehow that Zimmerman didn't fear for his life, and I'm not sure they will be able to do this.

 

[jon_mx]

I believe the injuries substained do not have to be serious. It just has to be a reasonable belief that if the fight were to continue they would have been. At what point can we say with utmost confidence would trayvon stop the beating? My guess is he would have beaten him until he was knock out of conscience. Is that serious? I would be hard pressed to say no.

 

[timschochet]

Even in Tim's version, Martin initiates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

You answered your own question. If you have a loaded weapon and your opponent does not, then it's unlikely that you fear for your life.

 

[timschochet]

I believe the injuries substained do not have to be serious. It just has to be a reasonable belief that if the fight were to continue they would have been. At what point can we say with utmost confidence would trayvon stop the beating? My guess is he would have beaten him until he was knock out of conscience. Is that serious? I would be hard pressed to say no.

Even if you're right, if I were Zimmerman, my move would have been to pull my gun out, point it at Martin, and yell "stop!". I believe Zimmerman shot Martin because he was pissed off.

 

[jon_mx]

One piece of evidence that Tim completely ignores is the 911 call of a man screaming for help for over 40 seconds (the screaming had even been going on for a while prior to the call). If Tim's version is correct, why is Zimmerman repeatedly screaming for help? IMO, that pretty much blows Tim's mind reading fantasy version out of the water.

 

[Christo]

So almost 300 pages later and I am still basically 100% correct in the conclusions I completely jumped to.

Are you talking about the ones where you accused anyone who didn't rush to judgment like you as being a member of Storm Front?

Yep. BTW, nice selective editing.

Do you mean the part where you've now concluded he wasn't acting in self-defense even though you don't know all of the facts?

link?

The part you didn't like me editing.

 

[Christo]

I don't get all the racial profiling hype in this thread. I'll give the Tim-crowd the benefit of the doubt, hypothetically speaking let's say Z profiled M. Does that give M the right to physically assault Z and if so under what conditions? People can argue all day long if Z didn't do this then M wouldn't do that, but you know what that's not how the law works so stop the nonsense. There is no law that says you cannot get out of your car and follow someone and ask them questions. There is no law that defends a person's right to physically assault another person under those circumstances.

First off, I have no "crowd". The answer to the bolded, as I've stated several times, is no. I bring up racial profiling mostly because of the vehemence with which certain people here want to deny that it took place, or ever takes place. I find their refusal to acknowledge that we continue to live in a society in which racism remains prevalent and institutionalized within law enforcement as highly problematic. But does this fact specifically determine the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman? Absolutely not. Compared to what actually happened during the confrontation, it has only peripheral bearing.

My point is nobody knows if it took place, compared to your view that it clearly did. My second point is even if it did take place it does not excuse Martin's actions. Absent Zimmerman chasing down, tackling Martin and begin to take swings at him, the Martin defense-camp doesn't have a leg to stand on IMO.

We don't know what Martin's actions were. You seem to be implying here that Martin deserved to die.

Tim, why don't you just tell us what you THINK happened. You have made it very clear in this thread that you think Zimmerman is guilty of murder even though you cannot prove it in a courtroom which I am fine with. Tell us your version of the events where you come to the conclusion that Zimmerman is guilty of murder.ETA: I don't want to hear about any of the testimonies or other such "evidence", in layman's terms just tell us what you think really went down. I'm not looking for your bullet list that you already posted unless you explain the injuries that Zimmerman sustained.

I've done so several times. What I think happened is this: Zimmerman confronted Martin, was accusing and rude, and Martin decided to beat the crap out of him. Zimmerman got angry that he was being beaten down by a skinny black punk whom he probably thought he could take, and in a fit of rage pulled out the gun and shot Martin to death. At no time did Zimmerman truly fear for his life. He was just pissed off that he was losing. That's what I think happened. Can it be proven with evidence in court? Extremely unlikely. I hope so, though.

Can't be disproven either. All we have in this case is Zimm's word and various conflicting testimony from the neighbors and Zim's wounds. If getting your head scraped in a fight allows you to kill someone legally in Florida, Zim wins. If it comes down to having to trust Zim's word to find him not guilty, he's in increasingly deep #### as he appears to have some serious issues with both the truth, races, and normal human behavior.

Of course it can. Zimmerman can get on the stand and tell the jury he feared he was going to lose the fight, that Martin said "you're going to die tonight" and Zimmerman believed he would die if he didn't use his gun. If the jury believes him, he has "disproved" the charges against him.What do you think "proof" is?

 

[Christo]

Even in Tim's version, Martin imitates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

Because reasonable actions have to be maintained to use self-defense (or one of its clauses).

Link?

 

[Christo]

Even in Tim's version, Martin initiates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

You answered your own question. If you have a loaded weapon and your opponent does not, then it's unlikely that you fear for your life.

Unless that person is on top of you and you are having difficulty reaching your gun.

 

[TexanFan02]

Even in Tim's version, Martin initiates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

You answered your own question. If you have a loaded weapon and your opponent does not, then it's unlikely that you fear for your life.

Unless that person is on top of you and you are having difficulty reaching your gun.

Apparently he didn't have difficulty reaching his gun.

 

[Christo]

Even in Tim's version, Martin initiates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

You answered your own question. If you have a loaded weapon and your opponent does not, then it's unlikely that you fear for your life.

Unless that person is on top of you and you are having difficulty reaching your gun.

Apparently he didn't have difficulty reaching his gun.

Oh? How do you know?

 

[Neofight]

Witness 9 is George's cousin. Sorry, but this is funny, molestation, playing doctor for a decade, whatever. It doesn't sound like they ever had intercourse, just played around a lot and when she became of age to realize she'd been had... well, there's money to made on her pervert cousin now.

Witness 9 told prosecutors the molestation began when she and Zimmerman were young children. Her parents were moving to another state and she and her sister were sent to stay with Zimmerman’s family in Virginia.

“We would all lay in front of the TV” to watch movies, she said, “and he would reach under the blankets and try to do things. … I would try to push him off, but he was bigger and stronger and older,” she said.

He touched her improperly, she said, and at least once, when she was 12, forced her to touch him.

The last sexual encounter, she said, happened when she visited Zimmerman’s family in Lake Mary. He directed her to lay on a bed and began to massage her, she said.

“I just got up and I ran out of the house and I got in my car,” she said, adding that Zimmerman “only chased me to the front door.”

She and her parents eventually confronted Zimmerman at an Orlando-area restaurant, she said. Zimmerman said he was sorry and left, she said.

See the pattern? He only chased her to the front door, just like he only chased Trayvon a few yards towards the sidewalk. This witness confirms how silly is the notion obese George could chase down Trayvon.

You get a kick out of this?

Absolutely. If you think that's horrible, have fun assassinating my character. This case, including this cousin and her misspent youth with George, and the new black panthers, and the race baiters, marches, skinheads, dopey president, malicious lying prosecution, closet sociopath defendant, drama queen judge, incompetent defense team, lazy sensational media, wild family histories on both sides, and on and on and on, is a great black comedy to me... no pun intended. If my favorite sitcom MASH could turn war into a dark comedy, then this sad homicide is no big thing to me. It takes an old cynic like me to laugh at it, but I am... guilty as charged.

Good on you, mate. Just one question: if the lunaticincestuousaggronarcissisticsociopath####wit Zimmerman is all that and more; what makes you believe he truly acted in self defense? Seducing your cousin may be funny (depending on where you are from), but killing a kid for walking through your neighborhood isn't a black comedy (or any other shade). It's a ####### tragedy.

By the bye, MASH at least had decent writing.

Seducing your cousin is not funny, but you are for putting it that way. This whole case works like that. Read or listen to her statements and tell me you think there's something awful there. It sounds very phony to me. She is scarred from doing sexual things as a little girl with a little boy. She complied by her own admission but is haunted. George is now famous and she has a juicy story to share and possibly embellish. Her hatred for George's racist mom makes her seem vindictive to me. Cynic that I am.Killing a kid for walking through your neighborhood is not any shade of comedy, I agree, but you're funny for putting it that way. Being a lunaticincestuousaggronarcissisticsociopath####wit does not make one guilty of murder. I believe George had good reason to call the police about a suspicious Trayvon. I believe George stopped following Trayvon as soon as he was told it wasn't needed and several minutes before he was assaulted. I believe Trayvon made it home (Dee Dee said as much) and went back down that sidewalk to confront George (after sizing him up). Maybe he hid in the shadows, but it doesn't matter. He didn't go home and he could have. He did end up dead in the area he was seen fleeing. My original thoughts on the timeline were likely correct. The prosecution has testified they have no evidence George confronted Trayvon; no evidence he followed Trayvon after being instructed against it; and no evidence that George threw the first punch; and for that matter, they have no evidence George threw a single punch. The only eyewitness to the struggle is adamant that George was on his back. I believe George was stunned by the assault and ended up yelling for help. He yelled between 17-20 times and his assailent didn't relent. A witness yelled for them to stop and that he was calling the cops, but Trayvon didn't relent. In fear of greater harm, George shot him. Even in Massachusettes, if I'm correct, this is self defense. I don't believe these things because George said so. I believe them because they make the most sense from the evidence I've seen. The state will probably dump a couple more discoveries on us through August so maybe they have something convincing. So far, not even close.

So yeah, I think people who buy the media narrative and claim Zimmerman shot an innocent boy trying to walk through a neighborhood are funny. Cynic that I am.

Horrible, horrible schtick. You use too many words to basically contradict yourself. That aint being cynical.

 

[TexanFan02]

Even in Tim's version, Martin initiates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

You answered your own question. If you have a loaded weapon and your opponent does not, then it's unlikely that you fear for your life.

Unless that person is on top of you and you are having difficulty reaching your gun.

Apparently he didn't have difficulty reaching his gun.

Oh? How do you know?

He used it to shoot Martin.

 

[Chaos Commish]

No, fatness (and maybe you too) accused me of that, but it never happened. I think it was ATC1 who posted from Wagist and I told him their map was weak.

Oops, that's correct. Then Fatness accused you of relying on it, since you weren't really saying where you were getting your info. It's been a long thread.

I repeatedly advised you all to look at the map, listen to the phone calls and check the time logs. I stated several times those things were FACTS. They were the only info I was using. That I did my own analysis seemed hard for you younguns to believe. The internet has made you all lazy bones. I fell behind others doing the same and later let them do the heavy lifting, but listening to the calls, watching the time, and applying them to a map was pretty straightforward common sense approach to understanding what did, didn't, could, and couldn't have happened. It still is and to answer a question posed by someone else about whether that stuff will be presented at trial: Yes, it appears both sides are developing timelines based on the facts.Source material you should enjoy.

 

[TexanFan02]

No, fatness (and maybe you too) accused me of that, but it never happened. I think it was ATC1 who posted from Wagist and I told him their map was weak.

Oops, that's correct. Then Fatness accused you of relying on it, since you weren't really saying where you were getting your info. It's been a long thread.

I repeatedly advised you all to look at the map, listen to the phone calls and check the time logs. I stated several times those things were FACTS. They were the only info I was using. That I did my own analysis seemed hard for you younguns to believe. The internet has made you all lazy bones. I fell behind others doing the same and later let them do the heavy lifting, but listening to the calls, watching the time, and applying them to a map was pretty straightforward common sense approach to understanding what did, didn't, could, and couldn't have happened. It still is and to answer a question posed by someone else about whether that stuff will be presented at trial: Yes, it appears both sides are developing timelines based on the facts.Source material you should enjoy.

Yeah, O'Mara did put a bunch of irrelevant stuff in that motion, they're right.

 

[Charlie Frown]

You jackals haven't jumped all over this yet?

Zimmerman family friend claims he molested her, new audio tapes reveal

How is this relevant?

He told her he didn't like black people while molesting her. He's a d-bag who doesn't like black people. He killed a black person.

Obviously these allegations are true. Nobody would lie about anything like that.

To me it would seem that defense is trying to influence the potential jury pool by releasing anything thing they can (true or not) to make Zimmerman look bad (doesn't need much help). Isn't this considered unethical or something?

 

[Christo]

Even in Tim's version, Martin initiates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

You answered your own question. If you have a loaded weapon and your opponent does not, then it's unlikely that you fear for your life.

Unless that person is on top of you and you are having difficulty reaching your gun.

Apparently he didn't have difficulty reaching his gun.

Oh? How do you know?

He used it to shoot Martin.

So, in your mind if a task is accomplished it couldn't have been difficult. BRILLIANT!

 

[mad sweeney]

I believe the injuries substained do not have to be serious. It just has to be a reasonable belief that if the fight were to continue they would have been. At what point can we say with utmost confidence would trayvon stop the beating? My guess is he would have beaten him until he was knock out of conscience. Is that serious? I would be hard pressed to say no.

#### yes. And so would I. If I was scared because some dude I didn't know was following me around and came at me with a bunch of interrogative questions instead of identifying himself and a scuffle broke out, I'd pound the dude until he was unconscious. At no time did Zimmerman not present himself as a non-threat to Martin. All he had to do was say "I'm with the neighborhood watch" instead of "who are you, why are you here?". At the time the scuffle happens, Martin doesn't know who this guy is, what he intends, whether he has a weapon or not etc...

 

[jon_mx]

I am still waiting to see how Tim can reconcile his version of events with the man screaming for help. Easily the most solid piece of evidence which speaks to the state of mind of Zimmerman when he pulled the trigger. The man on the tape was scared, not even remotely fiting the obscenely biased version which Tim put out. That almost has to be some horrible shtick.

 

[Christo]

I believe the injuries substained do not have to be serious. It just has to be a reasonable belief that if the fight were to continue they would have been. At what point can we say with utmost confidence would trayvon stop the beating? My guess is he would have beaten him until he was knock out of conscience. Is that serious? I would be hard pressed to say no.

#### yes. And so would I. If I was scared because some dude I didn't know was following me around and came at me with a bunch of interrogative questions instead of identifying himself and a scuffle broke out, I'd pound the dude until he was unconscious. At no time did Zimmerman not present himself as a non-threat to Martin. All he had to do was say "I'm with the neighborhood watch" instead of "who are you, why are you here?". At the time the scuffle happens, Martin doesn't know who this guy is, what he intends, whether he has a weapon or not etc...

This may just be what saves Zimmerman.

 

[timschochet]

I am still waiting to see how Tim can reconcile his version of events with the man screaming for help. Easily the most solid piece of evidence which speaks to the state of mind of Zimmerman when he pulled the trigger. The man on the tape was scared, not even remotely fiting the obscenely biased version which Tim put out. That almost has to be some horrible shtick.

It could have been Martin screaming for help once Zimmerman pulled out the gun.But more likely it is Zimmerman. And it doesn't contradict my scenario. If I'm getting beaten up, I might scream for help too. It still doesn't mean I fear for my life. The main problem, for me, with your scenario is that the entire time Zimmerman KNEW he had a loaded weapon, and he knew fairly quickly that he was facing an opponent without a loaded weapon. If I were Zimmerman, and I knew these things, I would be confident that I am not the one that is going to die. So whether or not Zimmerman screamed for help, I still find it more likely that he was not fear of his life, and therefore did not act in self-defense.

 

[pittstownkiller]

Even in Tim's version, Martin initiates the violence. The part which I don't understand, is if Zimmerman is really a racist and thinks all black kids are punk criminals, in what universe do you have to live in to not have some fear for you life if you are getting your butt-whipped by some unknown punk and you have a loaded weapon do you not have at least some reasonable fear for your life?

You answered your own question. If you have a loaded weapon and your opponent does not, then it's unlikely that you fear for your life.

How would Zimmerman possibly know that Martin was not armed?

 

[Christo]

I am still waiting to see how Tim can reconcile his version of events with the man screaming for help. Easily the most solid piece of evidence which speaks to the state of mind of Zimmerman when he pulled the trigger. The man on the tape was scared, not even remotely fiting the obscenely biased version which Tim put out. That almost has to be some horrible shtick.

It could have been Martin screaming for help once Zimmerman pulled out the gun.But more likely it is Zimmerman. And it doesn't contradict my scenario. If I'm getting beaten up, I might scream for help too. It still doesn't mean I fear for my life.

The main problem, for me, with your scenario is that the entire time Zimmerman KNEW he had a loaded weapon, and he knew fairly quickly that he was facing an opponent without a loaded weapon. If I were Zimmerman, and I knew these things, I would be confident that I am not the one that is going to die.

So whether or not Zimmerman screamed for help, I still find it more likely that he was not fear of his life, and therefore did not act in self-defense.

Really? Did he frisk him?

 

[pittstownkiller]

and not tried in the court of public opinion to the level that he cannot receive a fair trial.

Everyone is tried in the court of public opinion. Take OJ for example. Judicial court said one thing, public opinion said another.

Wrong comparison here BST; the prosecutor and Martin's family attorney are attempting to create a lynch mob.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Tim you're falling apart at the seams here.

I believe the injuries substained do not have to be serious. It just has to be a reasonable belief that if the fight were to continue they would have been. At what point can we say with utmost confidence would trayvon stop the beating? My guess is he would have beaten him until he was knock out of conscience. Is that serious? I would be hard pressed to say no.

Even if you're right, if I were Zimmerman, my move would have been to pull my gun out, point it at Martin, and yell "stop!". I believe Zimmerman shot Martin because he was pissed off.

two black eyes, a broken nose, possibly dizzy from getting your head slammed against the sidewalk (honestly how else do you scrape your head in two places enough to make you bleed like that), a high school footballer on top of you and you think you can lay there and point a gun at him at that close range and expect he is just going to get off of you and not:A) knock it awayB) pin your hand down while he REALLY starts wailing on youC) wrestle it away from you and use it against youDo you know how hard it is to see with two black eyes? ...enough entertainment for one day.

 

[Chaos Commish]

I am still waiting to see how Tim can reconcile his version of events with the man screaming for help. Easily the most solid piece of evidence which speaks to the state of mind of Zimmerman when he pulled the trigger. The man on the tape was scared, not even remotely fiting the obscenely biased version which Tim put out. That almost has to be some horrible shtick.

It could have been Martin screaming for help once Zimmerman pulled out the gun.But more likely it is Zimmerman. And it doesn't contradict my scenario. If I'm getting beaten up, I might scream for help too. It still doesn't mean I fear for my life. The main problem, for me, with your scenario is that the entire time Zimmerman KNEW he had a loaded weapon, and he knew fairly quickly that he was facing an opponent without a loaded weapon. If I were Zimmerman, and I knew these things, I would be confident that I am not the one that is going to die. So whether or not Zimmerman screamed for help, I still find it more likely that he was not fear of his life, and therefore did not act in self-defense.

How could he know he Tray wasn't armed? You can't make up your own facts. As for knowing he had a weapon causing him to believe he couldn't die... well, you need to think that through logically.If you've listened to the call with the clear cries for help and believe whoever that was wasn't horrified, you're being dishonest. Those terror filled cries are awful and the reason I treated Christo with disdain and believed Zimmerman was a stone cold killer back on page 30 or so.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Witness 9 is George's cousin. Sorry, but this is funny, molestation, playing doctor for a decade, whatever. It doesn't sound like they ever had intercourse, just played around a lot and when she became of age to realize she'd been had... well, there's money to made on her pervert cousin now.

Witness 9 told prosecutors the molestation began when she and Zimmerman were young children. Her parents were moving to another state and she and her sister were sent to stay with Zimmerman’s family in Virginia.

“We would all lay in front of the TV” to watch movies, she said, “and he would reach under the blankets and try to do things. … I would try to push him off, but he was bigger and stronger and older,” she said.

He touched her improperly, she said, and at least once, when she was 12, forced her to touch him.

The last sexual encounter, she said, happened when she visited Zimmerman’s family in Lake Mary. He directed her to lay on a bed and began to massage her, she said.

“I just got up and I ran out of the house and I got in my car,” she said, adding that Zimmerman “only chased me to the front door.”

She and her parents eventually confronted Zimmerman at an Orlando-area restaurant, she said. Zimmerman said he was sorry and left, she said.

See the pattern? He only chased her to the front door, just like he only chased Trayvon a few yards towards the sidewalk. This witness confirms how silly is the notion obese George could chase down Trayvon.

You get a kick out of this?

Absolutely. If you think that's horrible, have fun assassinating my character. This case, including this cousin and her misspent youth with George, and the new black panthers, and the race baiters, marches, skinheads, dopey president, malicious lying prosecution, closet sociopath defendant, drama queen judge, incompetent defense team, lazy sensational media, wild family histories on both sides, and on and on and on, is a great black comedy to me... no pun intended. If my favorite sitcom MASH could turn war into a dark comedy, then this sad homicide is no big thing to me. It takes an old cynic like me to laugh at it, but I am... guilty as charged.

Good on you, mate. Just one question: if the lunaticincestuousaggronarcissisticsociopath####wit Zimmerman is all that and more; what makes you believe he truly acted in self defense? Seducing your cousin may be funny (depending on where you are from), but killing a kid for walking through your neighborhood isn't a black comedy (or any other shade). It's a ####### tragedy.

By the bye, MASH at least had decent writing.

Seducing your cousin is not funny, but you are for putting it that way. This whole case works like that. Read or listen to her statements and tell me you think there's something awful there. It sounds very phony to me. She is scarred from doing sexual things as a little girl with a little boy. She complied by her own admission but is haunted. George is now famous and she has a juicy story to share and possibly embellish. Her hatred for George's racist mom makes her seem vindictive to me. Cynic that I am.Killing a kid for walking through your neighborhood is not any shade of comedy, I agree, but you're funny for putting it that way. Being a lunaticincestuousaggronarcissisticsociopath####wit does not make one guilty of murder. I believe George had good reason to call the police about a suspicious Trayvon. I believe George stopped following Trayvon as soon as he was told it wasn't needed and several minutes before he was assaulted. I believe Trayvon made it home (Dee Dee said as much) and went back down that sidewalk to confront George (after sizing him up). Maybe he hid in the shadows, but it doesn't matter. He didn't go home and he could have. He did end up dead in the area he was seen fleeing. My original thoughts on the timeline were likely correct. The prosecution has testified they have no evidence George confronted Trayvon; no evidence he followed Trayvon after being instructed against it; and no evidence that George threw the first punch; and for that matter, they have no evidence George threw a single punch. The only eyewitness to the struggle is adamant that George was on his back. I believe George was stunned by the assault and ended up yelling for help. He yelled between 17-20 times and his assailent didn't relent. A witness yelled for them to stop and that he was calling the cops, but Trayvon didn't relent. In fear of greater harm, George shot him. Even in Massachusettes, if I'm correct, this is self defense. I don't believe these things because George said so. I believe them because they make the most sense from the evidence I've seen. The state will probably dump a couple more discoveries on us through August so maybe they have something convincing. So far, not even close.

So yeah, I think people who buy the media narrative and claim Zimmerman shot an innocent boy trying to walk through a neighborhood are funny. Cynic that I am.

Horrible, horrible schtick. You use too many words to basically contradict yourself. That aint being cynical.

It isn't shtick. I didn't contradict myself. I am cynical regarding anything the media reports about this. Afaict, you're a troll. You occasionally pull your head out of the sand to take random ####shots but never offer enough words to seem anything but ignorant beyond Al Sharpton's pov.So, just one question since I made the effort to answer yours. What makes you think it wasn't self defense?

 

[BustedKnuckles]

I am still waiting to see how Tim can reconcile his version of events with the man screaming for help. Easily the most solid piece of evidence which speaks to the state of mind of Zimmerman when he pulled the trigger. The man on the tape was scared, not even remotely fiting the obscenely biased version which Tim put out. That almost has to be some horrible shtick.

It could have been Martin screaming for help once Zimmerman pulled out the gun.But more likely it is Zimmerman. And it doesn't contradict my scenario. If I'm getting beaten up, I might scream for help too. It still doesn't mean I fear for my life. The main problem, for me, with your scenario is that the entire time Zimmerman KNEW he had a loaded weapon, and he knew fairly quickly that he was facing an opponent without a loaded weapon. If I were Zimmerman, and I knew these things, I would be confident that I am not the one that is going to die. So whether or not Zimmerman screamed for help, I still find it more likely that he was not fear of his life, and therefore did not act in self-defense.

How could he know he Tray wasn't armed? You can't make up your own facts. As for knowing he had a weapon causing him to believe he couldn't die... well, you need to think that through logically.If you've listened to the call with the clear cries for help and believe whoever that was wasn't horrified, you're being dishonest. Those terror filled cries are awful and the reason I treated Christo with disdain and believed Zimmerman was a stone cold killer back on page 30 or so.

new evidence also includes an interview with Trayvon Martin's cousin, who was with him the day he died, and who said it was Martin, not Zimmerman, crying for help. Per the Sentinel: "One of Corey's investigators asked the cousin to identify a voice crying for help in the background of a 911 call. It was "without a doubt 'on a stack of Bibles' " Trayvon's, the cousin said, according to documents."

 

[Neofight]

Witness 9 is George's cousin. Sorry, but this is funny, molestation, playing doctor for a decade, whatever. It doesn't sound like they ever had intercourse, just played around a lot and when she became of age to realize she'd been had... well, there's money to made on her pervert cousin now.

Witness 9 told prosecutors the molestation began when she and Zimmerman were young children. Her parents were moving to another state and she and her sister were sent to stay with Zimmerman’s family in Virginia.

“We would all lay in front of the TV” to watch movies, she said, “and he would reach under the blankets and try to do things. … I would try to push him off, but he was bigger and stronger and older,” she said.

He touched her improperly, she said, and at least once, when she was 12, forced her to touch him.

The last sexual encounter, she said, happened when she visited Zimmerman’s family in Lake Mary. He directed her to lay on a bed and began to massage her, she said.

“I just got up and I ran out of the house and I got in my car,” she said, adding that Zimmerman “only chased me to the front door.”

She and her parents eventually confronted Zimmerman at an Orlando-area restaurant, she said. Zimmerman said he was sorry and left, she said.

See the pattern? He only chased her to the front door, just like he only chased Trayvon a few yards towards the sidewalk. This witness confirms how silly is the notion obese George could chase down Trayvon.

You get a kick out of this?

Absolutely. If you think that's horrible, have fun assassinating my character. This case, including this cousin and her misspent youth with George, and the new black panthers, and the race baiters, marches, skinheads, dopey president, malicious lying prosecution, closet sociopath defendant, drama queen judge, incompetent defense team, lazy sensational media, wild family histories on both sides, and on and on and on, is a great black comedy to me... no pun intended. If my favorite sitcom MASH could turn war into a dark comedy, then this sad homicide is no big thing to me. It takes an old cynic like me to laugh at it, but I am... guilty as charged.

Good on you, mate. Just one question: if the lunaticincestuousaggronarcissisticsociopath####wit Zimmerman is all that and more; what makes you believe he truly acted in self defense? Seducing your cousin may be funny (depending on where you are from), but killing a kid for walking through your neighborhood isn't a black comedy (or any other shade). It's a ####### tragedy.

By the bye, MASH at least had decent writing.

Seducing your cousin is not funny, but you are for putting it that way. This whole case works like that. Read or listen to her statements and tell me you think there's something awful there. It sounds very phony to me. She is scarred from doing sexual things as a little girl with a little boy. She complied by her own admission but is haunted. George is now famous and she has a juicy story to share and possibly embellish. Her hatred for George's racist mom makes her seem vindictive to me. Cynic that I am.Killing a kid for walking through your neighborhood is not any shade of comedy, I agree, but you're funny for putting it that way. Being a lunaticincestuousaggronarcissisticsociopath####wit does not make one guilty of murder. I believe George had good reason to call the police about a suspicious Trayvon. I believe George stopped following Trayvon as soon as he was told it wasn't needed and several minutes before he was assaulted. I believe Trayvon made it home (Dee Dee said as much) and went back down that sidewalk to confront George (after sizing him up). Maybe he hid in the shadows, but it doesn't matter. He didn't go home and he could have. He did end up dead in the area he was seen fleeing. My original thoughts on the timeline were likely correct. The prosecution has testified they have no evidence George confronted Trayvon; no evidence he followed Trayvon after being instructed against it; and no evidence that George threw the first punch; and for that matter, they have no evidence George threw a single punch. The only eyewitness to the struggle is adamant that George was on his back. I believe George was stunned by the assault and ended up yelling for help. He yelled between 17-20 times and his assailent didn't relent. A witness yelled for them to stop and that he was calling the cops, but Trayvon didn't relent. In fear of greater harm, George shot him. Even in Massachusettes, if I'm correct, this is self defense. I don't believe these things because George said so. I believe them because they make the most sense from the evidence I've seen. The state will probably dump a couple more discoveries on us through August so maybe they have something convincing. So far, not even close.

So yeah, I think people who buy the media narrative and claim Zimmerman shot an innocent boy trying to walk through a neighborhood are funny. Cynic that I am.

Horrible, horrible schtick. You use too many words to basically contradict yourself. That aint being cynical.

It isn't shtick. I didn't contradict myself. I am cynical regarding anything the media reports about this. Afaict, you're a troll. You occasionally pull your head out of the sand to take random ####shots but never offer enough words to seem anything but ignorant beyond Al Sharpton's pov.So, just one question since I made the effort to answer yours. What makes you think it wasn't self defense?

You contradicted yourself within three sentences of the first post quoted here. Seriously, you are confusing apathy with cynicism.Not that it matters, but running three small businesses limits the amount of time I spend here, as well as the length of my posts. This thread jumped the snark a long time ago, but your schtick struck me as a new angle. I suppose I should congratulate you.

 

[Chaos Commish]

I believe the injuries substained do not have to be serious. It just has to be a reasonable belief that if the fight were to continue they would have been. At what point can we say with utmost confidence would trayvon stop the beating? My guess is he would have beaten him until he was knock out of conscience. Is that serious? I would be hard pressed to say no.

#### yes. And so would I. If I was scared because some dude I didn't know was following me around and came at me with a bunch of interrogative questions instead of identifying himself and a scuffle broke out, I'd pound the dude until he was unconscious. At no time did Zimmerman not present himself as a non-threat to Martin. All he had to do was say "I'm with the neighborhood watch" instead of "who are you, why are you here?". At the time the scuffle happens, Martin doesn't know who this guy is, what he intends, whether he has a weapon or not etc...

This may just be what saves Zimmerman.

Agreed. Mad sweeny, if the person who frightened you to the point of trying to beat him unconscious cried loudly for help well over a dozen times and a neighbor yelled at you to stop your attack and that he was calling the cops, would you still "pound the dude until he was unconscious"?

 

[timschochet]

I am still waiting to see how Tim can reconcile his version of events with the man screaming for help. Easily the most solid piece of evidence which speaks to the state of mind of Zimmerman when he pulled the trigger. The man on the tape was scared, not even remotely fiting the obscenely biased version which Tim put out. That almost has to be some horrible shtick.

It could have been Martin screaming for help once Zimmerman pulled out the gun.But more likely it is Zimmerman. And it doesn't contradict my scenario. If I'm getting beaten up, I might scream for help too. It still doesn't mean I fear for my life. The main problem, for me, with your scenario is that the entire time Zimmerman KNEW he had a loaded weapon, and he knew fairly quickly that he was facing an opponent without a loaded weapon. If I were Zimmerman, and I knew these things, I would be confident that I am not the one that is going to die. So whether or not Zimmerman screamed for help, I still find it more likely that he was not fear of his life, and therefore did not act in self-defense.

How could he know he Tray wasn't armed? You can't make up your own facts. As for knowing he had a weapon causing him to believe he couldn't die... well, you need to think that through logically.If you've listened to the call with the clear cries for help and believe whoever that was wasn't horrified, you're being dishonest. Those terror filled cries are awful and the reason I treated Christo with disdain and believed Zimmerman was a stone cold killer back on page 30 or so.

I am not going to deny that you, and JoJo, and jon don't have good arguments to make here. You do, and it is just as reasonable to assume that Zimmerman may have in the end acted in self-defense as to assume that he committed murder, based on what we know. I've never argued otherwise. I think he committed murder because it fits with my sense of this case, as I have explained- but my sense of the case could very well be wrong. You make a good point about the screams, and jon does as well. The more I think about it, my own scenario of what happened does seem inconsistent with the screams. I may have to rethink it.