E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSProsecutors release more evidence in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, including the hoodie Martin was wearing the night he died, and several 911 calls George Zimmerman made to 911. WESH's Bob Kealing reports.
A special prosecutor in the second-degree murder case against George Zimmerman released more evidence Thursday, including a first glimpse at what the FBI has found in its civil rights investigation with dozens of witnesses.
The evidence released by Special Prosecutor Angela Corey also included interviews from one of her investigators with Trayvon Martin's cousin, who was with him the night before Martin was shot.
The cousin "was asked if Trayvon mentioned anyone in the complex he was having problems with," the report says. The cousin said he hadn't, and he also said he "did not see Trayvon smoke marijuana."
Both Martin and his cousin lived in Miami, and were close, spending almost every weekend together, the boy told investigators. On Feb. 26, the night Martin died, Martin had been walking back to his father's girlfriend's home in Sanford, having just purchased Skittles and an iced tea from a convenience store.
His father’s girlfriend never had any contact with Zimmerman, and didn't even know her community, the Retreat at Twin Lakes, had a neighborhood watch program, according to Thursday's documents. Another resident told investigators he first met Zimmerman in September of 2011, when Zimmerman told him "he was going around trying to get people interested in joining the neighborhood watch."
Martin’s death sparked a nationwide wave of protests after Zimmerman initially evaded arrest by using Florida's Stand Your Ground law as justification for shooting Martin; many accused Zimmerman of racial profiling.
Key evidence includes 911 calls from Zimmerman and witnesses to the Sanford police. In one call, Zimmerman reported seeing Martin, and, despite a dispatcher's instruction not to follow the teen, ended up in a scuffle with him. Pleas for help during the clash could be heard on other 911 calls.
"I was yelling for help, but no one would help me," Zimmerman allegedly told Officer Tim Smith, who was first on the scene in the gated community in Sanford, Fla., after Zimmerman shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman had his concealed weapons permit in his wallet at the time, Smith said, the newly released evidence revealed.
Martin's family sure they heard him on 911 calls
In the batch of evidence released Thursday, investigators asked Martin's cousin if he could identify the voice on those calls.
"When asked about the calls for help he said without a doubt 'on a stack of Bibles' that it was Trayvon's voice,'" the document states.
Martin's mom, Sybrina Fulton, also told police it was her son yelling on the tapes.
Martin lived with his mom. In her interview with investigators, Fulton described him as an eleventh-grader who had dreams of going to college, possibly Florida A&M or University of Miami. Martin's favorite subject was math and he loved aviation, she said.
The night he was killed, Martin was wearing a pin with a photo on it. The button was made in memory of a cousin who had died, his mother told police.
Martin had several tattoos, including one of "praying hands" on his arm, said Fulton.
Interviews with unidentified witnesses were included in the newly released evidence, too. One woman, whose bedroom window was near where Martin was shot and who had called 911, told detectives she had heard "agonizing yelps." When pressed on the details of Zimmerman's and Martin's physical confrontation, she said "she had been unable to see much due to the glare from her window so she turned off her night light. She then saw two people on the ground," but was not able to give many specifics.
Numerous witnesses described hearing the pop of a gunshot, and told detectives it was the first time they had ever heard a gun go off.
A longtime friend of Zimmerman's who occasionally accompanied him to a shooting range also spoke with investigators, describing Zimmerman as "not a good shot at first but [he] improved slowly over time."
Sanford police officers were interviewed by nearly a dozen FBI agents. Agents also spoke with Zimmerman's former girlfriend, as well as his neighbor, Frank Taffee, and employees at the gun store where Zimmerman bought the firearm used to shoot Martin, according to The Sentinel.
Also released Thursday:
- Cell phone records from Trayvon Martin's father, Tracy
- Emails from Zimmerman and Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee
- Crime scene photos and diagrams
Seminole County jail records. Zimmerman has been arrested and freed on bail twice since he was charged with second-degree murder on April 11.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
George Zimmerman Reenacts Shooting of Treyvon Martin for Police at Crime Scene (Part 2)
.
Go to 5:58/ of 8:03 on the video-----where Zimmerman says
GZ--"After I shot him, he like sat up....
Investigator--"You're still in this position here basically...you bring(being?) him out here...You shot him so he's in the grass
GZ--"Yes, sir. He was on top of me like this and I shot him. And I didn't think I hit him 'cause he sat up and said ah.oh 'You got me. You got it. You got me' something like that. So I thought he was saying, I know you have a gun now, I heard it, I'm giving up. So I don't know if I pushed him off me or he fell off me. Either way I got on top of him and I pushed his arms apart and I said ''don't move'
Investigator--"Kinda flipped him over?
GZ--"I don't remember how I got on top of him-I'm sorry-
Investigator--"That's fine
GZ--"But I got on his back and I move his arms apart because when he was repeatedly hitting me in the face and the head, I thought he had something in his hands and so I ...just...moved his hands apart
Interviewer--"but you had him face down then?
You know, when I first learned of the shooting of Trayvon, I thought Zimmerman was JUST a bungling wanna be cop.
However, after studying the evidence carefully, I now think George Zimmerman IS GUILTY of 2nd degree murder.
Here is the conclusion I arrived at and why-----
.
.
.MY CONCLUSION is that Trayvon Marin WAS defending himself--------
* That Trayvon's body was found SEVERAL FEET from where Zimmerman said he shot Trayvon for pounding GZ's head.
.
.
* Where Zimmerman said he was holding down Trayvon's body is where Trayvons body was found.(HE was lying about saying that AFTER shooting Trayvon, he rolled Trayvon off and held Trayvon down for the purpose of keeping Trayvon from RESISTING him anymore.)
.
.
* This, as I see it, indicates that Trayvon was TRYING to PULL AWAY from George Zimmerman---probably was facing GZ----in order to back away and escape GZ's hold (GZ probably was holding the front of Travon's sweatshirt.
.
.
*It IS 2ND DEGREE MURDER if Trayvon was trying to flee from the fight.....from Zimmerman (who himself pointed out a different location for the head pounding-----several FEET-----from where Trayvon's body was found.)
why on earth is the prosecutor , trying this case in the media, she well knows she is narrowing the potential jury pool, each time she releases more information; the court should rein her in, or at least clamp down on all these releases.
@saxon,
Florida has a "transparency" law that requires prosecutors to make all evidence available to the public in all felony cases. There are some exceptions to protect minors and rape victims and such, but that only extends to blacking out names, phone numbers, addresses, etc. The law was passed because of several cases in which prosecutors (years ago) were accused of hiding information to bolster cases.
Prosecutors are well aware that this "narroes the jury pool" but there is nothing they can do about it. Advocates of the law say that it is only information that the jury will see anyway and that it benefits the defense enough to make it worthwhile.
It has been upheld in higher courts, so Zimmerman can't really challenge it. And the defense has been releasing a steady stream of heavily edited "evidence" so some of what the prosecution is releasing is actually from the defense team, but without the edits.
@you,
sorry, i posted this just as your post popped up. You beat me to it.
Several Feet??? YATHC Ok when your 6'3" (the coroners report means little to me at this point as its just a length measurement and rigor had probably set in. Plus his OWN MOTHER said he was 6'3") tall and you fall the other direction wow your at least SIX FEET from where the head bashing occurred. Plus you act like Trayvon died instantly and since he was talking he was probably conscious for a little while which explains how he could move his arms and George was pulling / pushing him off of this. Will you all realize this isn't the movies.....
I wish they'd go after 1st degree murder charges. He stalked the kid and shot him like a trophy animal.
This is what the jury will have to decide. Read 2 and 2b:
776.041Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1)Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2)Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b)In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html
George Zimmerman's statements and Demeanor in front of the investigators remind me so much of cops I have seen lying on the witness stand. Lies are more powerful than truth in police stae ZioNaziland. If he was a cop at the time he would have gotten leave(Vacation) with pay.
you all have thoughtful comments, we've voted you off the island. You should set up your own website on this case. You certainly have plenty of time on your hands.
dan123123123 You are correct, in the heat of the moment it is real east to loose track of a couple of feet here & a couple there. After being shot, he could have rolled off, tried to take a step or two & then fell forward. Hell after all that it could be real easy to have 5' to 30' difference in where between his head being slammed & where they finally ended up with Zimmerman on top. Have seen many fist fights, wrestling fights that covered a whole damned bar room.
You are completely ignorant of the law. There was zero premeditation, so there's no way in hell a 1st degree murder charge will stick. It's doubtful that a manslaughter charge is applicable (hence the 1st DA opting not to pursue the case). As much as your over-emotional opinion wants you to jump to the highest murder charge possible, the evidence swings the other way, champ.
No, dan-------Zimmerman shot Trayvon in the heart. Trayvon's body should have been the location Zimmerman pointed out as being where he shot Trayvon because Trayvon was pounding his head (not 30 feet away)
Therefore, I do not think Zimmerman's story is anywhere near credible-------
More likely-------
Trayvon was TRYING to PULL AWAY from George Zimmerman---probably was facing GZ----in order to back away and escape GZ's hold (GZ probably was holding the front of Travon's sweatshirt.
Also, dan, the evidence at the scene is important------
Officer Santiago wrote that he "observed a key chain lying NEAR the T portion of the walkway, a black flashlight lying on the grass just east of the key chain.
Santiago also wrote that he "noticed a black cell phone near the area of Martin"
Therefore, the key chain and the black cell phone (note: I am not talking about the headset) were at least 30 feet apart.
Conclusion:
If the fight was way down the sidewalk at the T , that is where Trayvon would have been shot based upon Zimmerman's statement that he shot Trayvon while his (Zimmerman's) head was being pounded on the sidewalk by Trayvon .
---------------Also, that tree (where GZ is standing in the video re-enactment)is located at the beginning corner of the 1st condo from the T.
Trayvon's body was located between that lst condo and the 2nd condo---about 30' feet from the keychain and location George pointed as being where he shot Trayvon because his head was being slammed on the concrete.
Thus, the keychain backs up what Zimmerman points out as to the location of where he shot Trayvon.
In the above interview George Zimmerman says that is where he got on top of Trayvon ('s body) and was holding him (body) down.
If martin had enough energy left in him to say, "oh you got me" certainly he would be able to stumble serveral feet if not yards from the "spot" in question
@yahtc
In the aftermath of trauma, memory is often skewed. This is a well-known psychological fact. You are putting far to great an emphasis on Zimmerman's walk-through the day after the event took place-- a time when his mind, nerves and body are all still in shock.
Case-in-point. Ask anyone who's been in a traumatic experience and ask them to recall the details of the event, and you'll find that the majority of people, even trained, combat-proven professionals, have patchy memories of the actual events. Read about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_and_trauma
and if you don't like the wiki, here's a Berkley link:
http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm/trauma.htm
Now I don't have any idea how a jury after looking at all the evidence is going to vote in this case. But the number of FBI agents being used is beyond any scope of reasoning. They are not having to find an unknown assailant or track down international leads as everything is right there. It really gives the appearance of the DOJ making a decision that they want to persecute this guy. Innocent or guilty I don't know but how about all those FBI guys working to discover the leaks in the White House on National Security information or helping in the Fast and Furious investigation since the DOJ still doesn't know who ultimately authorized it. It sure doesn't take this many FBI agents to help in the Martin case.
The "you got me" is part of Zimmerman's story.
Mark--You wrote-----
See my comment at #2 post.
Anyone listening to the cries for help on that 911 call knows that it's the voice of a kid, not a 30-year old man. I can't believe that a grown man can't defeat a kid by means of his own strength.
And I don't believe that Trayvon Martin attacked anybody or was out looking for a fight. I believe Zimmerman pursued him, grabbed him, and Trayvon tried to get away and yelled for help. He was probably scared to death, as I would be if someone grabbed me inexplicably.
Zimmerman's quotes of Martin's speech to him are laughable, something out of a bad crime flick. "You go me." or "You're gonna die tonite." Or "you got a problem, homie?". Martin would have to be some kind of psycho to run out to the convenience store and then decide to attack a grown man on the way home for no reason.
Well said, KeenInsight!
yahtc
The fight appears to have lasted about 90 seconds based on it had to start at least 30 seconds before the first 9-1-1 call and when the shot is finally heard on ALL the 9-1-1 calls. Most likely, and this will be up to the prosecution to prove, is that when George was first hit he dropped whatever he was holding... flashlight and keys or at least shortly after things started. Where was Trayvon's phone found? Also a distance from the body. Obviously the fight was a bit of a dance. The witnesses who heard the shot then looked outside are quite positive that George disentangled himself from trayvon (whether on top or bottom per any one witness) and then straddled his body. That George was unable to accurately identify WHERE the shot happened isn't much of a surprise. It was DARK, RAINING and he was in a struggle after being hit. Short of blood or debris it isn't easy to remember where some events happen. If you have ever had your nose bloodied or been in a car accident you would understand the loss of position awareness.
The LIKELY comment was much shorter and George filled in the blanks. Hole in the heart and 2.5 liters (5 pints) of blood in the chest cavity don/'t leave a lot of room to speak. It is also possible that Trayvon was making that comment before the gun went off so "you got me" may have been a last ditch surrender that George failed to register until after the shot happened. I can see the prosecution making that argument very easily.
PLEASE do us a favor.. learn how to put links in, and we don't need to see photos 9 days before he was shot, or you to quote others comments from OTHER threads into this one.
hey you all have thoughtfult comments are you waiting for your welfare check and this is why you have so much free time? how are those internet computers at the public library working for you?
The "you got me" is part of Zimmerman's story.
You responded------
I agree with that observation.
.
.
Since that is a speculation-----I will speculate that maybe Zimmerman said, "I got you" to Trayvon.
I am going to get a welfare check? You learn something everyday!
.
Uncle Henry --see my post at #2.
I thought about commenting on this article, but I can see there's no point.
It's pretty clear reading up and down these comments that most of you didn't click on the "The Orlando Sentinel. link in the article.....It's not very detailed, but gives some insight on the information gathered, not released before....I suggest you read it....
One thing no one can argue,George Zimmerman is entitled to DUE PROCESS! Which Zimmerman denied Trevon Martin!!!
I was expecting to see some 'new evidence' - but this is nothing.
And what difference does it make if his cousin 'saw' Martin smoking pot - if the toxicology report says that Marijuana was found in his system, then he obviously DID smoke it that day somewhere. Also, his cousin's claiming that the voice yelling for help is Martin's is hardly surprising, but a good voice analysis of the recording should be able to provide a 'most likely' match. The FBI spending so much time on this is evidence of a 'political prosecution', influenced by the Obama Administration.
The charges will most likely be dropped - but not until AFTER the election to avoid a riot - after things settle down.
you all have thoughtful comments
Orlando Sentinel-----
.
Special Prosecutor Angela Corey on Thursday releases another round of evidence in her second-degree murder case against George Zimmerman, including a first look at what FBI agents have turned up in their civil rights investigation.
Nearly a dozen FBI agents interviewed several Sanford police officers, including the case's lead investigator, Chris Serino. They also talked to Zimmerman's former girlfriend, who accused him in court paperwork of being violent; neighbor Frank Taffee; several unidentified civilian witnesses and several gun shop employees, including those who worked at the store where Zimmerman bought the gun he used to shoot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
Summaries or copies of those interviews will be in the new evidence, but there'll be no official finding by the FBI or the agency overseeing the federal investigation, the Civil Rights Division of theU.S. Department of Justice.
Corey's office released this new batch of evidence — its second — to defense attorneyMark O'Maralast month and a list of what it includes to everyone else.
There are no obvious blockbusters, but there are several things that could be revealing. Among them are:
•Email from Zimmerman and Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee.
•Cell phone records from Trayvon's father, Tracy Martin.
•The testimony of 21 new unidentified "civilian" witnesses – those not working for a government agency.
•What Central Florida gun shop owners had to say about Zimmerman's comments and behavior while buying the gun that killed Trayvon, taking target practice and getting training for his concealed weapons permit.
•What Zimmerman told police dispatchers and officers the six times he called Sanford and Seminole Countyauthorities, presumably reporting problems as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer, in the six months before Trayvon's shooting.
•The account of a private investigator hired by the Martin family.
•Crime scene photos, diagrams and dispatch records.
•Seminole County jail records.
•-What state alcohol agents have to say about Zimmerman. The agency arrested him in 2005 for resisting arrest without violence during a raid at a bar near the University of Central Florida.
#281 - Wed Jul 11, 2012 10:16 PM EDT
.
.
The presence of THC in one's system doesn't indicate WHEN they smoked or otherwise consumed marijuana. So stop speculating that Martin "DID smoke it that day" because it can stay in one's body for approximately 6 weeks after it was introduced.
James--You observed that--
I agree with you 100%-----George Zimmerman should be tried in a court of law with the jury handing down the verdict.
.
.
Also, I think it is absolute horrible that George has received threats.
No defendant in America should ever receive threats!!!!!!!!
Why is the media still talking about the iced tea and skittles. When have you ever been told what a person purchased in a similar story.
Chad-2729725
BECAUSE he was gunned down,
Because he was perceived to be a burglar....
A burglar armed with iced tea and skittles...
The law, The State Prosecution - must release what it knows. I believe its called "Discovery"? Based on that little quirk in the law, it would wrong for the "State" to withhold meaningful evidence. The Defense is not held to the same burden of proof, as so many George "apologists" keep repeating, Its the burden of the "State" to prove that George is Guilty, Guilty - Guilty. All the defense has to do is introduce enough doubt that the Jurors (Or the court) establish that the prosecution didn't prove their ascetions. Even more unfortunate, the victim is unable to offer sworn testimony.
If the Judge felt this case could be anymore tainted than it already has become (Thank You, much.Sanford PD).
It appears the Judge is satisfied with progess of the case as it stands. If the State didn't release information - I'm pretty sure the "Georgians"... have a field day - mush as they didn't - until the Judge explained why it was necessary to increase George's bail. With cash and a passport; even with the GPS, George would have, could have an hour or more head start, before they would have time to respond to him cutting the Tracking device off ... more than enough time for a well planned exit from the jurisdition of Florida or Federal law Enforcement. I almost made it - until it was pointed out how much cash he had accumlated (I think he had more than that - pretty sure that is why he was never concerned where bail was set. The "indigent" ploy was just that - acting .
Bottom line, the Prosecution is just doing their duty - if the judge told them to not reveal what they keep finding as they turn over all the rocks in George's past. It's becoming more and more like a toddlers "Easter Egg" hunt. People are triping over each other to give up the goods on George.
I get the impression he does not seem to develop "close friendships"... he's more of a user of people than a real friend?
This is the new evidence the prosecution released? Wow. Amazingly @!$%#ty evidence. Not guilty is most likely out of this. Although we may see some nice rioting thanks to the media hype. Well done morons
It is part of the story. The point is he was a teenager walking home from a convenient store after purchasing iced tea and skittles but got mistaken for a possible burglar.
George is the one releasing those threats, If he wanted to - he could just ignore them. George Wants Threats, He wants to hype this as much as possible - make people think he is some target of some great conspiracy. The fact is - people are very unhappy that he killed a kid and did everything in his power to smear the victim to cover his tracks.
anytime the public gets emotionally involved in a case as blatant as this tragic execution, you can bet there will be extremist who would love to be give a free- pass to shot a socially ostracised defendant. They don't even really concern themselves with the case. They just want to "kill something" and get away with it. Oop's... That sounds suspiciously like what George did.
Nothing , so far, justified chasing down Trayvon and killing him. There is no justification he can use which has a foundation with legal standing.
As for the marijuana "evidence", in the blood - it will remain present for days, maybe a little longer. But it can also be found in hair samples - up 3 to 6 months after you have been in the presence of second hand smokers of Weed. (for all you hypocrites: That's a hint - get a hair cut before going in for a drug test, they are starting to ask for both the filled cup and a hair sample).
This ain't really about George, its about how Trayvon was shot, barely 2 weeks after he turned 17, killed by a cut-rate, wanna-be, vigilante.
This whole thing is politicized and overblown. The court of public opinion has no bearing in this case.
The initial police report described the black male subject as 6'00" and 160 lbs.
One of the calls that 911 fielded that night was from a female caller who told 911 there were two men struggling in her backyard. One can hear screams (indistinguishable) in the background of this call and 45 second into this call the sound of a single gunshot is heard, at which point the screams abruptly stop. This caller does not describe to 911 anything like what Zimmerman describes--clutching his chest and saying 'you got me' and falling back. The caller wonders aloud to the 91 operator 'why did he shoot that man?' and then shortly thereafter she tells dispatch she can see flashlights and hear voices, at which point the operator says that that is the police on the scene and the call ends.
According to Ofc Ricardo Ayala's police report the black male subject was found lying facedown in the grass with his hands under his body. According to the 911 call quoted above, the woman who saw the shooting and was on the phone with 911 until after the police came, and she does not describe anything like what Zimmerman says happened in this particular version of the incident.
"One can only hope, pray for a good riot", that would provide you with the excuse you need to feel, your wrong-headedness is justified... when in fact is smells lie weeks-old fish... rotten!. Some of these Conservatives... just can't get over the fact that this is not about riots. Its about why a young man could not be allowed to walk home, in peace. Some Judas, had to ruin it for everyone.
Glad they also got his Father's cell phone records too....can't wait to see them....Maybe we'll find out where he really was when in his Phonecall to Police the next morning at 8:39 AM calling to report Travon missing, he says the last time he saw him was 8-8:30 the night before ....at 8:15 the night before Trayvon was lying dead in the grass for an hour not 200 feet from what Tracy Martin described as " a girlfriends " backdoor.....What, he didn't see all the Police cars and ambulances with all the flashing red lights and heard the commotion all the rest of the neighbors heard ????
This was the guy "Supervising" Trayvons 10-day school suspension....
Dispatch-- "What was he wearing ?"
Tracy Martin--" Uhhhmm... I'll say he probably had on a pair of kahki shorts uuuuh, and a gray sweatshirt ....and a pair of Jordon tennis shoes, white or red tennis shoes"
In the 7-11 video, it's pretty clear he's wearing long pants....
Probably shorts....red, maybe white tennis shoes, saw him at 8-8:30 ???
Pretty clear he didn't have a clue....cause he WASN'T there the night before.....
Cool, calm and collected, carefully choosing his words....click on the 2 audio links:
http://www.news4jax.com/news/911-calls-from-Trayvon-Martin-s-father-released/-/475880/15189084/-/xcn47a/-/index.html
Trayvon's father was "supervising" a prostitute while his son was beating up on George Z.
What A Family!
Agreed! Little travy the gangbanger shouldn't have taken on someone with a weapon. What a dumbass. He got what he deserved. GO TEAM ZIMMERMAN!!!
The public court of opinion has every right to judge everything about this case. That is exactly why our forefathers in their great wisdom gave us freedom of speech- so we dont get led like lambs to the slaughter. It is our right and our responsibility to review our justice stystem and scream bloody murder if we dont like something. No one should take the law into their own hands, but that "innocent until proven guilty" stuff is for the courtroom, not the public opinion arena.
Amanda-2017567...(#1.39)..." According to the 911 call quoted above, the woman who saw the shooting and was on the phone with 911 until after the police came"
The Police arrived about a minute or so after the shooting.
Not a single person that gave Police a Statement said they witnessed the shooting...Ear-witnesses yes, but no eyewitnesses....most were hiding away from any window and the ones that did look out said it was too dark to make anything out with the exception of the witness who came out his back patio door, the one that stated the guy in the red jacket was on the bottom...told the 2 on the ground he was calling 911......he went back in to call 911...that is when the shot was fired.
I want to personally thank all of the posters who have determined guilt or innocence in this case, using only the "facts" made up in your head. It is refreshing too see just how far zealots are willing to go to either persecute or exonerate someone depending on which way their particular political winds are blowing.
Thanks also to the FBI for sending a dozen agents to assist on the case because as Gtouch said above, clearly their assistance could be used in the Fast and Furious case where no one knows shyt
Were I the prosecutor, I think I'd try to stifle the information about the tattoos. Praying hands tattoos are gang tattoos. (Even if Justin Beiber did get one.)
Zimmerman shot Martin in the chest while Martin was on top of him, really? I got clipped in the upper arm once and bled all over the place. If Martin was on top when shot in the chest Zimmerman should have been COVERED with blood. Like all over his chest at minimum. The cops never noted this, the photos never showed this. How did he not get covered in blood? Could it be that he was not under Martin, but instead on top?
vwterry
Have you taken the time to READ the autopsy report? First your clip to the arm was a surface injury, second your heart continued to beat and supply more blood. Trayvon was shot in the chest through the heart. His heart could no longer pump blood, if it could even beat. 2.5 liters (5 pints) of blood pooled INSIDE his chest cavity, not lungs. Could it be that George on top just doesn't fit your agenda?
The repports released in the first set of evidence from the prosecutor states that Trayvon's DNA wasn't found on Zimmerman,nor was Zimmerman's found on Trayvon's hands. If you were punching someone repeatedly in the face as Zimmerman claims and banging their head into concrete there would be some cross contamination. There aren't any scrapes on Trayvon's hands except for one lone scratch on a finger,not a knuckle but a finger. The police report states that it was found to be "highly unlikely" that Zimmerman's injuries were the result of the beating he detailed to them. The police felt his injuries would have had to be more severe if he had been beaten as badly as he claimed. His story doesn't add up.
I think it's time for some logic here. Is it logical that Zimmerman would be screaming for help when he was the one with the gun? NO. Is it logical that Trayvon would circle around to attack someone he was trying to get away from? NO. Is it logical that Zimmerman was getting his head beaten into a sidewalk when he only has 2 small cuts on his head? NO. Is it logical that Trayvon hit Zimmerman for no reason at all? NO. Is it logical that Trayvon was supposedly beating the crap out of Zimmerman, yet he has only one small cut on his finger and none of Zimmerman's DNA on him? NO. Is it logical that anyone would believe every word that comes out of known liar's mouth? HECK, NO!
He was getting beat on... didn't have the gun in hand.. had just been knocked to the ground he has NO military or police experience. Probably the first time in his life he was bested in a physical altercation if not the first real fight since grade school.
What does logic have to do with two males looking for trouble fueld with testosterone? Even the gf indicates that Trayvon spoke first so it would appear Trayvon approached George.
He was getting beat on... had just been knocked to the ground he has NO military or police experience. Probably the first time in his life he was bested in a physical altercation if not the first real fight since grade school.
You're making a lot of assumptions here and stating them as if they were facts. Again, we don't know that Zimmerman was getting "beat on". His injuries (and the small cut on Trayvon's finger) are more consistent with having gotten punched in the nose and falling backwards, hitting his own head on the sidewalk.
didn't have the gun in hand..
And yet, he still managed to shoot Trayvon.
What does logic have to do with two males looking for trouble fueld with testosterone?
I believe one person was looking for trouble and one person was just minding his own business.
Even the gf indicates that Trayvon spoke first so it would appear Trayvon approached George.
If someone walks up behind you, aren't you going to ask them what they want? Just because Trayvon asked Zimmerman what was going on certainly does NOT mean that he started the altercation, NOR that he "deserved" to be shot. He had every right to ask Zimmerman why he was following him around and Zimmerman should have explained that he was Neighborhood Watch. Or, better yet, Zimmerman should have taken the 911 operator's suggestion and stayed in his truck and let the police handle it.
Again, some people are believing every word that comes out of a known liar's mouth - and that is the most illogical of all!
Wow these are the first comments I've read that have people talking over what they believe are the "facts, and not just spewing racist crap. This is not a race thing at all... it's a guilty or innocent thing... and the only other "thing" it could be is a take your guns and right to carry type of thing. Ahh the gun grabbers. Guys wake up there are tons of people who would like to F over your rights over this retards decisions. Personally I think he grabbed trayvon end up loosing then bang! His trump card was to pull his pistol if he was loosing.. not pull it when attacked...
Most likely not- since they would be behind you and you wouldn't know about them until they made a comment. Zimmerman made a comment immediately following Trayvon's, so it seems to me that Trayvon made visual contact with Zimmerman first and made the comment- had Zimmerman made visual contact first he would have spoken first.
In the first bout of statements released from Trayvon's girlfriend, she states he made a comment about going to see 'what his deal was' (referring to approaching Zimmerman.) at which she told him to run. This lines up with Zimmerman's description of Trayvon approaching him momentarily, then turning around and going the other way. Wanting to find out 'what his deal was' isn't quite the same as minding his own business- even if there is nothing wrong with doing it.
Just because Zimmerman was suspicious over SUSPICIOUS BEHAVIOR and was trying to find out what was going on certainly does NOT mean that he started the altercation, NOR that he "deserved" to be assaulted.
Zimmerman had every right to ask Trayvon why he was wandering around and Trayvon should have explained that he was walking to where he was staying. (In all reality, neither had ANY requirement to RESPOND to the other... Whether they did or not doesn't matter, what matters is the punch being thrown.)
Zimmerman wasn't in his truck when the dispatcher told him they 'don't need him to do that.' By all accounts (judging from the further conversation on the call to dispatch, the change of wind sound in the background) he did cease following Trayvon. HOWEVER- OR better yet, Trayvon should have gotten off the phone with his girlfriend when he noticed someone following him and called 911... OR better yet, Trayvon should have sprinted the less than 30 seconds it would have taken him to get home INSTEAD OF asking Zimmerman what his problem was/why he was following him.
We can sit here and 'shoulda, woulda, coulda' all day long. Ask ten different people and you'll get ten different suggestions as to what either of them should have done differently. NONE OF THAT MATTERS!
What matters is that NEITHER ZIMMERMAN NOR TRAYVON HAD BROKEN ANY LAWS UNTIL THE FIRST PUNCH WAS THROWN! Trayvon possibly having smoked pot even five minutes before this DOESN'T MATTER (although it likely would have helped him... Chances are he would have avoided the confrontation had he been high.) Zimmerman getting out of his truck to keep a visual on Trayvon DOESN'T MATTER (it's NOT ILLEGAL!)
Personally I think Trayvon got irritated at being followed, and confronted Zimmerman because of it. It's a move you'd expect from a typical hot-headed late teen male, and from all accounts Trayvon fit that bill. That is backed up by the FACT that had he headed straight to the dad's girlfriends residence, he would have been home BEFORE Zimmerman got off the dispatch call to police. Also this is backed up by the dispatch call in which Zimmerman describes Trayvon momentarily turning towards and approaching him, then turning back around and going the opposite direction. Backed up by Trayvon's girlfriends statement that he wanted to go find out what Zimmerman's deal was, but she told him to run (may have been redacted, I can't seem to find it now.)
Not saying that Trayvon being irritated that he was being followed was wrong- but he handled it incorrectly, and that was the problem in the situation.
Everyone is making a big deal about Zimmerman getting out of his truck. Guess what people? We will have daily interactions with people, both in good connotations and bad. You are expected to know how to interact with people WITHOUT resorting to assault, even if you have problems.
zanilth
good post...
how is an adult putting themselves in the role of neighborhood protector and not identifying yourself as such to a kid they have deemed suspicious, not a dumb and vacuous position to take? one might excuse this type of reasoning from a kid who just turned 17, but a gun toting 28 year old?...not at all.
this is 'i don't have to' sandbox mentality that doesn't place geoz in a good light.
if a total stranger who was following, you straight out demanded to know why you were in a specific place without telling you why, would you explain to them without question? don't lie because you know you wouldn't.
ZANILTH
you do know this comment only works if he was on public property, right!
Everyone is making a big deal about Zimmerman getting out of his truck. Guess what people? We will have daily interactions with people, both in good connotations and bad.
Thats the big deal, people who live in gated communities PAY TO BE LEFT ALONE from the daily interactions with the general public and it is assumed by normal level headed home owener that anyone with in those gates are there with permission.
For zimmerman to walk up to anyone and take an AUTHORITATIVE STANCE is not within his rights because the LAND he is on he does not OWN, twin lake condos own the common area where he and martin were located, not on zimmerman front lawn.
Thus in public you can ask anyone because VIA your taxes everyone has the right to know. But on private property the land use laws do not give rights to citizens, only the code of conduct FROM THE HOME OWNERS ASSOCATION.
zimmerman could have questioned martin
1. if he was hired by twin lakes to do security
2. if he had a binding contract with twin lakes to be a watch man
3. he witnessed martin commit a criminal act which he could sign a citizens arrest form for the police.
cjfromMN
Castle Doctrine.
TRUST
that doesnt apply here because IT WASN'T HIS LAND he was on the twin lakes property outside of his PERSONALLY OWNED HOME!!
try again.
A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal doctrine that designates a person's abode >>>>>>>HE WAS NOT AT HIS TOWNHOME HE WAS IN THE COMMON AREA(or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as a car or place of work) as a place in which the person has certain protections and immunities and may in certain circumstances use force, up to and including deadly force, to defend against an intruder>>>>>>THEY WERE IN A COMMON COMMUNITY SPACE AND THERE WAS NO STRUCTURE MARTIN WAS TYING TO ENTER without becoming liable to prosecution.
like i said try again
sheesh!
Castle Doctrine varies by state... SYG in FLORIDA EXTENDS Castle Doctrine to the person. Lets see what the courts have to say. The legislation is flawed in FL.
TRUST
One: It establishes, in law, the presumption that a criminal who forcibly enters or intrudes into your home or occupied vehicle is there to cause death or great bodily harm, therefore a person may use any manner of force, including deadly force, against that person.- NOT APPLICABLE
Two: It removes the "duty to retreat" if you are attacked in any place you have a right to be. You no longer have to turn your back on a criminal and try to run when attacked. Instead, you may stand your ground and fight back, meeting force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or others. [This is an American right repeatedly recognized in Supreme Court gun cases.]- HE IS NOT USING THE SYG AS HE LEGAL DEFENSE STRATEGY
Three: It provides that persons using force authorized by law shall not be prosecuted for using such force. --ITS NOT A LEGAL ISSUE OF FORCE BEING TRIED ITS WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH OF ANOTHER
cjfromMN
This case in in FL no MN. different state different LAWS. Put your MN lawbook down and go read FL Statutes.
He will be asserting Self Defense before trial and use FL Statute 776 during Trial which is FLORIDAS codification of Self Defense.
trust
THAT IS THE FLORIDA COPY YOU buFOON
What you seem to not be able to understand is dumb and vacuous (I prefer just plain stupid) does not equal illegal. People do stupid @!$%# all the time, and there is NOTHING you can do about it because it isn't illegal.
Besides- aside from yelling out of the window while Zimmerman was in his truck, I don't really forsee any time period he could have identified himself. Based on the KNOWN FACT that Trayvon posed a question to Zimmerman FIRST when they bumped into each other (we know that from the girlfriend's testimony) I believe Trayvon saw Zimmerman first. We know the button was on his hoodie when he was in the store- yet was in his pocket once the smoke cleared. Seems like he may have been preparing for a scuffle.
With that information, I believe it is most likely that Trayvon intended to do precisely what ended up happening, and I don't think he gave Zimmerman much time to respond- especially if he had surprised Zimmerman when he jumped out and asked what his problem was- people usually don't reply the way you'd like them to when they are scared by someone jumping out of somewhere.
Where did I ever say Trayvon should have explained to them without question? Do me a favor- quit putting statements in my comments I never said. I actually believe I made a point of saying that NEITHER were required to respond to the other.
HOWEVER- punching someone in the face in this situation is DEFINITELY NOT the LEGAL, RIGHT, or SMART thing to do.
cjfromMN - Public property versus private property debate has absolutely no bearing on this case. Firstly, you'd have to prove that Zimmerman wasn't asked BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION to organize and head a Neighborhood Watch (which he was.)
Secondly you'd have to argue that the PUBLIC SIDEWALKS AND ROADWAYS of the neighborhood weren't in fact PUBLIC USE for the neighborhood (which they are).
Thirdly you'd have to argue that you have NO FREEDOM OF SPEECH ON A SIDEWALK (which we do.)
Finally- you'd have to be an ignorant SOB to even believe this would work. As far along as the case is and the prosecution hasn't even mentioned anything about a private property conflict? Come on- are you seriously going to sit here and make @!$%# up until you die just to make the case fit your agenda?
Yeah- so THAT'S why the HOA asked Zimmerman to organize a neighborhood watch- because all those burglaries weren't really burglaries, they were people who were GIVEN PERMISSION to go onto the property and take stuff... By the way, I'm sure you know what is said about people who ASSUME.
zanilth
That appears to be incorrect. Turns out that the deed/title/CC&R to RTL has NO public right of ways or easements. It states RTL owns ALL the land except those specific to the individual residences/homes. the only easements are utilities and wildlife set asides. Once the complex was completed even the builders/banks had their right of way rescinded. The term PUBLIC has specific legal context. RTL allows for RTL community members use of common/community property and facilities. Essentially the common HOA property is an extension of the front/back yard of the owners/renters. The facilities are open to use by owners/renters except the clubhouse which requires reservations and additional fees to use.
Otherwise I agree with your comment #1.65 - Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:58 AM EDT as well as others you have posted.
Yeah I worded it incorrectly, even when I was typing I knew it was going to come out wrong, but didn't have the time to clarify (kinda why I added 'for the neighborhood' after public use.) When I said public, I didn't mean the average person who doesn't live there has just as much right to saunter along the pathways and do whatever they want. The closer definition would be common or community areas.
My main point regarding that was this- unless they have established guidelines for conduct on those common areas and those guidelines are posted, your basic rights aren't infringed. For example- if they didn't have an established dress code, you could walk around in a bikini- but if they made the rule that you had to have shorts and a shirt, then you couldn't walk in a bikini. Just the same- IF they had rules stating you couldn't talk to someone who you didn't know/who was minding their own business (and yes, those rules and laws exist- first one that pops into my head is in New York, it's illegal to talk to a stranger on an elevator) then the argument would stick. Since they were both authorized to be using the common areas of the neighborhood, unless there were some established rules broken then it is a moot point.
Agreed, and likewise to yours.
ZANITH
DONT BE A CLOWN
the first reports out stated that the twin lakes condo association did not have zimmerman employed as a watchmen he volunteered
You obviously not a HOME OWNER because if you were you would know that THE PUBLIC HAS NO RIGHT TO YOUR PROPERTY.
and then you would be smart enough to know that bill of rights does not work for zimmermans ability to have authority over anyone period.
And try to be a big boy again in knowing that burglaries didnt occur at 7 pm while he was watching martin you twit.
MAYBE YOUR GET IT IF YOUR SEE IT FROM A DIFFERENT SOURCE THEN ME, AND THUS WANT TO FIND IT MORE IMPORTANT TO ADD TO THE GRAY MATTER VS THINKING OF TRYING TO ONE UP ME, ITS ABOUT MARTINS RIGHT TO BE LEFT ALONE BECAUSE AS BELOW PROVES ---ITS NOT HIS LAND TO DETERMINE WHO CAN BE AND NOT BE ON IT.
THUS IF HE RESPECTS THE RULES OF TWIN LAKES --HE WAITS FOR THE POLICE AND MARTIN WOULD BE ALIVE TO DAY----
Private property is both excludable and rival. Private property access, use, exclusion and management are controlled by the private owner or a group of legal owners. Private property is the employment, control, ownership, ability to dispose of, and bequeath land, capital, and other forms of property by persons and privately owned firms.[1] Private property is distinguishable from public property and collective property, which refers to assets owned by a state, community or government rather than by individuals or a business entity.
Public property is owned by the government, whether that be a local, county, state or the federal government. These properties include, but are not necessarily limited to, government office buildings, parks and other public areas, and some portions of infrastructure such as roadways.
Since government owns these properties, government plays a direct role in determining what is or is not permitted on these properties. Restrictions on types of vehicles, or the speed of vehicles, on a public roadway is legitimately maintained by the government, as they are responsible for those roadways. Likewise, preventing people from digging holes in a public park is also within the rights of government, as the property owner.
Public property must cater to as many citizens as possible, as the tax dollars used to fund government-owned properties generally come from everyone. Additionally, there are times when one must use government facilities, such as registering a vehicle, renewing a driver's license, or obtaining records.
By contrast, private property is owned by an individual, or by a group of individuals in the form of a corporation. Because the property is owned by an individual or a corporation, the owner(s) have the right to control how their property is used.
Even if one is invited to go to a park, they do not have the right to change the landscaping. Likewise, if one is invited onto property owned by another individual or corporation, the invitee does not have the right to dictate the actions of that owner on their property.
A private property owner, even if that property is open to the public, has the right to decide what activities take place on their property. If you are invited to someone's home, you do not have the right to destroy that other person's home, or engage in any other behavior which offends the property owner. Likewise, if you are invited into a business as a customer, you do not have the right to dictate proper behavior on that property to that property owner, nor destroy their property.
The evidence submitted by the prosecution includes statements indicating Zimmerman was asked by the HoA to organize a neighborhood watch organization. He didn't just come up with the idea off the top of his head and organize without the HoA knowledge or permission.
The RESIDENTS of the NEIGHBORHOOD have the RIGHTS to use the COMMON AREAS WITHIN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD UNLESS as trust_verify pointed out, reservations are required.
Obviously you aren't smart enough to know that Zimmerman didn't have to have authority over anyone in order to ask what they were doing there. It is a question that ANYONE can ask ANYONE ELSE at ANY GIVEN TIME. That does NOT mean that the person being asked is REQUIRED TO ANSWER.
Try to be intelligent and realize that burglaries had happened at various times of the day- some in broad daylight in the 2-3pm hour. The specific timeframe has NO BEARING WHATSOEVER on whether someone will burglarize a house or not.
Also, try to be intelligent and realize that Zimmerman wasn't on duty at that time- he wasn't representing the HoA as the Neighborhood Watch Organizer, he was a concerned citizen.
He's within his rights as a RESIDENT of the neighborhood to ask what someone is doing on COMMON AREAS of the neighborhood- because it's JUST A QUESTION. HAD he said "You don't belong around here, get out!" then yes, you would have a point.
Where's your evidence that he wasn't waiting on police and that Trayvon didn't double back or hide and wait on him, then jump him?
Your phrase (which I'll suggest you link your source to next time) is key. They have the right to decide what activities take place on their property- so why don't YOU supply their written and established guidelines that prevent one resident from talking to another on communal walkways?
zanilth
Thank you.
CJ
The HOA of RTL is most likely a 501(c)(3) non profit corp. Most HOA are unless they are part of a larger for profit entity, such as when first being built.
I have actually owned properties and homes in various places. Thus I am aware of the DIFFERENT rules and laws in different states. If you want to really get your brain twisted into a pretzel check out properties in Hawaii where you can buy a home and still not own the land. That includes in a condo complex where at the end of the fixed term lease the land owner (usually a trust for the Hawaiian Native people) can decide not to renew the lease and tell you to MOVE your entire building and if you don't they can remove it at your expense.
Again... What we know for a FACT. George and Trayvon exchanged words. That exchange resulted in a fight. Trayvon is now dead. It is up the the jury to determine, under FL LAW, if it was justified or not. My and others opinions is George will not be found guilty of the charge of 2nd degree murder. That is the ONLY charge filed against him that anyone ca refer me to. Stupidity is not an enforceable crime though George is guilty of FELONY STUPID.
Whether you like Georg or not, whether you believe George or not the stated facts in the previous paragraph are what they are. Both George and DeeDee state that TRAYVON spoke first. Both indicate that TRAYVON approached George. Barring any physical evidence, video, or before now unknown witness and that they both state the same sequence it is reasonable to believe that Trayvon approached George and spoke first. But we don't have that quite to the level of being a fact. That also has nothing to do with the right to use Self Defense.
ZANITH
your reply makes me feel that you are choosing to either by or act like one of the DUMBEST PEOPLE I have ever seen reply. And instead of POINTING OUT to your very thick minded ass, what it means between the difference of private vs public property and your rights, why don't we go the other way, the way that puts checks and balances into place
1. the bill off rights is what?
2. private property pay taxes to who?
3. who pays monthly dues when you live in a town home community?
4 when you go to a movie theater who asks loud people to leave the police or security or an usher and why?
5. when you go to a store and they list that bags must be left out front, why can they do that?
6. when you leave a costco bestbuy walmart-- why do they have bang checkers or security at the door?
7. do the police work for the government or for the twin lakes?
8. who makes the rules in your own house, YOU OR ME?
9. can i come into your home and tell people what to do?
DO YOU NOT GET IT, AGIAN THIS WAS NOT TO CHANGE YOU MIND ON HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT ZIMMERMAN.
IT WAS FOR YOU TO FEED SOME CHEESE TO THE CLEARLY STARVED MICE IN YOUR HEAD, THAT ZIMMERMAN CAN NOT ASSUME AN AUTHORITATIVE MANNER AND THAT HIS SUSPICIONS ARE NOT ACTIONABLE.,
your comprehension level or honesty level or lack of integrity shine very brightly
because the question is very simple to know if zimmerman could do what he did, if YOU LIVED in twin lakes condos and had him ask your people what and where and why -- they are doing when they come to visit you.
and EVEN though you might not be man or woman enough to admit it, you wouldnt stand for it because you know he does not run, control, or represent twin lakes and your guest are there with your permission.
i've never said or implied that stupidity equated to anything illegal. the point i was making was rather than fulfilling his role as the protector of the peace and making his intentions known, he exercised his 'right' to be an idiot.
are you saying trayvon should have explained to geoz where he was going even though geo had not answered his question as to why geoz was following him?
yes, and we see how not responding worked out. verbal communication is an adult way to get a grasp on a situation that in this case could have avoided tragedy.
if geoz had time to demand of trayvon "what are you doing around here?" as dee dee stated he did, then he had time to reply to trayvon asking him "why are you following me?" even if it's as geoz claims trayvon says "do you have a problem?" geoz only replies "no i don't have a problem".
the picture button of trayvon's deceased cousin may have been torn off in the scuffle and the police may have placed it in his pocket.
i believe that when geoz went into his coat the trayvon probably thought this stranger was reaching for a weapon and was trying to protect himself. in other words "stand his ground".
it makes no sense that a kid who everyone says was mild mannered, and no one coming forth to charge otherwise, would become so enraged that he would beat, batter and then declare to geoz "you're going to die tonight" simply because the man was following him. ridiculous.
if anyone had reason to react in anger it would be geoz who just got his a$$ handed to him. he's the one on meds and has a history of violence. why would anyone choose to believe anything spewing from his lips, especially after his lying in court?
Just where do you come up with THAT? The police have managed to document EVERYTHING they found and WHERE they found it. Just why would they choose the button to incorrectly document? If they said they found it in a pocket then that is where they found it. The tea was in his pocket as were the skittles. The phone was found away from the body and documented. They recorded where the flashlight and keys were found. Come on Irene you know your "may have placed it in his pocket" is beyond simple speculation but a reach in this case.
So you agree that he wasn't angry before getting his ass handed to him. Haven't others stated that trayvon had every reason to be angry for being followed?
read your statement. Think you might have an angry view there?
Would that be the same kid who EVERYONE said would not have a baggie that contained MJ nor would he ever use it? Would ANYONE speak ill of the dead?
He was a young man involved in a fight who found a gun and POSSIBLY chose to use a bit of bravado in his words. How many times have we heard PEOPLE say "I am going to kill you" and words to that effect. NOT ridiculous...(btw thank you for spelling that correctly. I've seen it spelled with rE way too many times lately)
It still amazes me that the George camp is willing to admit George is human and has faults but the Martin camp refuses to admit in the same paragraph that Trayvon was anything but perfect. Any giving of an inch on Georges side is taken as a yard with demands for more. Maybe that will help you understand why George and the defense team refuse to give even the width of a hair.
this is a reach? yet you believe the tale that after allegedly being severely battered and nearly unconscious geoz had the strength to physically out maneuver an 'enraged' trayvon. he claims he grips trayvon's hand under his armpit as he grabbed his weapon using the same arm, no less?
he was paranoid and not intellectually (or mentally) equipped to deal with this type of situation.
no. i've seen others comment that trayvon had the right to be concerned, or be in fear, of this strange man following him. team zim are the only ones i've read that buy into the idea that trayvon struck geoz out of anger. most trayvon supporters believe he thought geoz was reaching for a weapon (which he very well may have been...we'll never know).
"angry view" is quite an exaggeration. it's disgusting, however, that this man with a record for violence, conniving and lying is, for some unknown(?) reason, conceived by many as delivering only the gospel.
they're willing to demonize the unarmed teenaged victim, who may not be an angel, but so far seems to be cleaner than geoz. "would anyone speak ill of the dead?" yeah, plenty don't find it beneath them. they refer to him as "thug, hood rat" that got what he deserved and some to stoop to calling his young 15 year old gf a "ho". they attack the parental skills of his mother and father because trayvon (who was barely 17 years old) did not possess the negotiating skills of an adult (which should be expected of 28 year old geoz). they blame the father for not staying home to babysit his son who was old enough to be alone in a city where he had no friends to leave and hang out with.
i've heard of no one denying those accusations nor the other two suspensions for tardies and absences. none are indications of violent and murderous tendencies. just the same, many on this post are more than willing to "speak ill of the dead".
it's 'truth teller' geoz that made the claim trayvon was attempting to grab his gun (just before geoz was miraculously able to get a strong grip on his hand with his armpit, mind you...don't you find this lie at least slightly annoying?).
i find trayvon delivering a death threat as unbelievable as the supposed 'savage beating' trayvon executed on him for solely being followed.
no doubt, trayvon has been in other provoking situations but no one has come forward to say he pounded them mma style or threatened to kill them. until then i'll continue to chalk this up as another zimmerman lie.
the majority of the verbal attacks on geoz from trayvon's supporters have been surrounding his actions in this case. unlike personal attacks on trayvon having nothing to do with him being killed while unarmed.
the only fault that camp geoz has conceded is that he was stupid. even then they defend that with "it's not illegal to be stupid" (as if anyone said it was). "geoz wasn't pursing trayvon, he was just following him" (big difference). "he had no obligation to tell the young boy why he was following him". why wouldn't he to avoid things from escalating? oh, that's right, it wouldn't have changed anything because trayvon was such a "thug" he would have pummeled geoz for the hell of it.
All physical evidence released to-date supports Zimmerman's version of events. They have:
1. Zimmerman's defensive wounds, documented by both responding police officers, the paramedics on scene and his own physician the day after the attacks, clearly indicative of an assault.
2. Trayvon's lack of defensive wounds, indicative that he was the aggressor in the initial conflict. (I find it useful to consider domestic violence cases-- who goes to jail? The one with the bruises or the one without?)
3. The only eye-witness that saw the fight in-progress, not heard, but actually saw the fight, has provided testimony that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman, pounding his head into the pavement "with mma style moves." This corroborates Zimmerman's testimony.
4. The fact that head trauma, of any degree, is considered "inherently life threatening" in a court of law.
5. The fact that lethal force is authorized for self-defense when one's life is threatened. (See #4).
Unless some new physical evidence emerges, the prosecution has a very difficult case in front of them. All of their evidence against Zimmerman's claim of self-defense is circumstantial. That does not bode well for their chance of conviction. Physical evidence trumps circumstantial evidence nearly every time.
All that really matters is who initiated violent (criminal) contact with the other? Everything prior to that point was not illegal and is, frankly, irrelevant to the case. (With the caveat that the FBI have already ruled out racial profiling as a determining factor in the case-- had that possibility still been an open factor, I would concede that that evidence would have bearing on the case. As it has been ruled out, that whole smear can recede back to the dismal pit of bigotry that bore it). So, who initiated violent criminal contact on the other?
If it was Zimmerman, one would expect some kind of wound consistent with that on Martin-- but there is none. If Zimmerman attacked first, you would expect to find facial trauma, a black eye, broken nose, bruising, etc. or bruising on the arms from where the blow was deflected. The only one who has these types of wounds is Zimmerman. Not only are his wounds consistent with his story, but they have been corroborated by the only eye-witness to the fight. The fact that Trayvon has no wounds from the fight further suggests that Zimmerman was on the defensive the entire time-- right up until the gunshot.
I let the facts speak to the case. I find it highly spurious that Zimmerman, as many agitators like to frame it, would actively stalk a black male in his neighborhood with the express purpose of killing him and 1. let that person get close enough to him to do substantial harm and 2. call the police prior to enacting his "master plan." I also find it spurious the various accusations that the gun was out prior to the last seconds of the fight. That would mean that Trayvon was a suicidal idiot, which by all counts he wasn't, by suggesting that he would fling himself headlong into a physical altercation with a man armed with a gun. These particularly strained versions of the events that night defy credulity and are informed predominantly by imagination and emotion, rather than the facts released to-date. Neither are well-conceived nor corroborated by any extent physical evidence released so far.
If additional physical evidence comes to light that clearly incriminates Zimmerman as the initial aggressor, then I will gladly review that evidence and revise my opinion. Until such time, the facts strongly favor Zimmerman's self-defense claim. The fact that he has consistently cooperated with the authorities is additional (albeit circumstantial) evidence to his favor.
Cheers.
even had geoz's following trayvon been racially motivated that would not change the evidence as it stands nor make his version of events any less believable.
that's not necessarily the case. i'm sure you're aware that being stricken does not always result in physical injury. so let's keep it real. even for the horrendous beating geoz claims to have taken (mma style) his wounds did not look to be terribly severe. by the way, haven't heard that there were witnesses to the alleged head banging.
geoz's minor blackening of the eyes didn't show up until the following day. trayvon was killed within minutes after the scuffle so the was no time for bruising to develop on his body even if geoz had landed a significant blow.
it's been ages since anyone has advanced this premise. the fact now that geoz's reckless actions are responsible for the circumstances that terminated in the killing of an unarmed youth. race is not addressed in the charges.
where race is relevant is the way geoz was given a pass and not held even though some of the officers found his story to be questionable. a young black man would not have been released under these circumstances had he killed an unarmed white youth.
if the gun were drawn before the fight trayvon may have felt his chances were better by attempting to disarm geo rather than trying to outrun a bullet. that would be totally understandable.
what seems implausible to me are geoz's details of what he claimed happened in the film footage. read the first paragraph in #1.74.
there is no hard evidence that geoz didn't initiate the physical altercation. only geoz's claims. no visible injury on trayvon's body is not proof that geoz didn't strike him or at least make an attempt.The fact that he has consistently cooperated with the authorities is additional (albeit circumstantial) evidence to his favor.
are you referring to his cooperation in court when he allowed the claim of indigence to be floated?
it's easy for him to come across as cooperative when the victim is unable to dispute his story.
why do you think the decorated homicide detective found geoz's tale not to be credible?
irene46 and others
It is my intent to have a relaxing weekend... well as relaxing as my plans will allow lol but I wanted to hit a couple high points
Just what charges, PLURAL, are you speaking of? I yet to fine a charge other than 2nd degree murder with a lot of FLUFF attempting to support that charge.
It is reported that TRYAVON called her is HO. After hearing DeeDee's interview I think someone was confused... pick either Trayvon or her. She seems convinced she was going to BECOME his girlfriend. I don't believe the defense will have to work too hard to DESTROY her testimony... though I'm not sure why they would at this point with her confirming that Trayvon spoke and approached George first not the opposite. One of the questions, that will be legit to show potential bias, will be if they were intimate, had kissed or somewhere in between.
the majority of the verbal attacks on geoz from trayvon's supporters have been surrounding his actions in this case. unlike personal attacks on trayvon having nothing to do with him being killed while unarmed.
Perhaps you need to take off the blinders. MOST of the attacks on George have been on things outside the events of Feb 26 or the bail hearing. Even in your response to my statement you aren't willing to give the inch back. LOOK AT IT from a neutral corner. My statement was that The George camp is willing to admit George screwed up and has issues. Your response is well the George camp attacks Trayvon. I see NO willingness to admit that Trayvon or his camp have faults or issues. That is often called DENIAL.
The double standard flies sky high in this case. If George says something that has the slightest inconsistency or error it is more evidence of his being a liar but when the Martins appear to outright lie it is only an error or misspeak. just one example is when Tracy makes the call to report Trayvon missing and states he SAW trayvon between 8 and 8:30 and describes what he last saw him wearing.
Everyone have a decent weekend and be safe.
Clarification: The "MMA style" comment was made by the witness, not by Zimmerman.
Witness 6:
Taken from two different articles referencing the same witness statement.
As to the lack of defensive wounds on Martin, again, I think this is physical evidence in Z's corner. Had he assaulted Martin, there would be some kind of visible defensive wounds. Flesh does bruise after death. In fact, dating bruises on corpses is a forensic discipline in its own right, used to determine when certain trauma occurred-- either before or after death.
Without defensive wounds, Martin appears to be the aggressor, sucker-punching Zimmerman and then pinning him to the ground, pounding his head into the concrete. This is simply what the evidence suggests. There are other possibilities, but no evidence released to date supports these other potentials.
i was aware the witness interviewed described geoz as being beaten mma style. i was just referring to what the beating was called.
i did some investigating and found it is possible for there to be bruising after death. however, it does not always occur. it shouldn't be hard for the prosecutors to find experts that will testify to this being the case.
obviously you don't know much about physical altercations if you think all of them result in bruising. i have first hand knowledge (from my youth) that's not always the case.
charges...charge, whatever. the point the race is not an issue.
it was reported where? i've seen nothing about trayvon referring to dee dee as a 'ho'.
that's not a pass for a grown ass man to call this young girl such a thing. more stereotyping from camp geoz.
she in no way confirms that trayvon approached geoz because she said trayvon spoke first. he may have seen geo behind him, stopped, and then asked geoz why he was following him.
t_v you just need to stop the lying right now. how about an example of these off topic attacks on geoz. geoz's violent past and his problem with anger management are relevant to his actions on that fatal night. i like said, tell me of some attacks on geoz not relating to the case.
calling trayvon a thug and hot headed when he's been described as otherwise, digging up his suspensions from school for tardies and absentees and the fact that he smoked weed (which i'd venture to say most teens probably do) are personal attacks for the sake of it.
do you suppose that may be because geoz has as hell of a lot more reason to lie about the events of that night than mr. martin does about what time he saw trayvon or what he was wearing?
cjfromMN
Hey DUMB@!$%# (and I don't care about a suspension, so bring it mods)
UNLESS the Twin Lakes has POSTED RULES AND REGULATIONS regarding rights and allowable conduct, any person who has a LEGAL RIGHT to be there, still maintains their LEGAL RIGHTS. Walking up to someone and asking them a question is NOT BREAKING THE LAW UNLESS THEY HAVE POSTED SIGNS SAYING "DO NOT APPROACH AND CONVERSE WITH ANYONE."
"What are you doing around here?" is not an attempt to be authoritative. As I said earlier- had he tried telling Trayvon to leave, tried detaining or arresting etc, then YES you would have a point. But guess what, DUMB@!$%#? THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN!
Hey DUMB@!$%#! It's called putting a phone call in to Twin Lakes if you think the watch is being too aggressive- not assaulting the guy and getting SHOT!
You were on ignore for a reason, and now I remember why.
Context- it was an exact reversal of the quoted statement that was just as valid as the original statement. Some feel George should have identified himself, or made other statements- when I see those, I turn them around to show examples of the FACT that there were two sides in this conflict, and BOTH could have done things differently.
Not responding could have worked out very differently as well- had Trayvon not responded and turned the other direction to leave the immediate vicinity (or had he not doubled back or waited really...) However, that's neither here nor there... Here's the shining thing out of this situation- the ADULT WAY, but the problem in this situation is they weren't both adults, so how do you expect someone to handle things the adult way when they aren't an adult?
I have yet to meet a 17 year old who I would consider an adult. Not even mentioning how everyone still insists on calling Trayvon a child, most 17 year old males are still in the rash thinking phase, and have no idea what is going on in their own head much less whats going on around them.
Trayvon's girlfriend also stated Trayvon made the first statement. If Trayvon were heading to the residence he was staying at, Zimmerman would have been behind him and Trayvon never would have seen him (unless you're advocating that Zimmerman circled around buildings and outran Trayvon to get in front of him, then backpedal him to where the incident occurred....) SO Trayvon wouldn't have made the comment first.
Since he did, it seems like Zimmerman didn't have a whole lot of time to voice his comment before the scuffle started (remember, Dee Dee said it started pretty much immediately after the words were exchanged...) So what do you think should have happened- Zimmerman should have frozen time in order to give himself a few more seconds to come up with an appropriate reply?
HMMMMM.... Let's see.... Every individual scrap of fiber goes in evidence bags, but a torn off button goes in his pocket? Come on- stay realistic here please.
Sorry, this doesn't fly. If he saw a weapon coming out of Zimmerman's pocket, then yeah this would be the case. You cannot immediately assume that because someone has a pocket and puts their hand in it, they have a weapon and are going to use it on you.
I believe Trayvon was ticked that someone was following him, and did exactly what he told Dee Dee he was going to do- went back to find out what his deal was, and ended up hitting/jumping him when he found him. Whatever his reasonings were, unless Zimmerman had a weapon out at him OR hit him first OR tried to detain him, his reasonings were wrong and now his family is the ones paying the price for his bad decision.
Firstly, there are conflicting reports regarding Trayvon's behavior the same as Zimmerman's- and most aren't all sunshine and daisies. I don't think smoking weed is a big deal (most likely would have helped him make the smart decision and avoid Zimmerman if he would have been high) but there are other issues such as the repeated suspensions, burglary tools, and something about fighting in a localized 'fight club' style thing in Miami where he lived (didn't do too much research into that last one myself.) Secondly, I believe what the evidence shows, and based on what has been released by the prosecution, this is a bad situation where two people made bad decisions and it cost one their life- but this is not murder 2, at the VERY most it would be involuntary manslaughter (but that still doesn't negate the self defense route.) Finally, if I'm not mistaken Zimmerman himself didn't make the statements or 'lies' in court- it was his wife.
Firstly, it is a reach because police documenting the scene after the fact and Zimmerman making statements after the fact are two ENTIRELY different things. Secondly, obviously you've never heard of people lifting cars off others and such due to adrenaline rushes- I'm not saying I believe or disbelieve any 'feats of strength' Zimmerman claims that night, but I won't automatically discount it because it is quite possible.
Rightfully paranoid should you choose to want to use paranoid, but I do feel he was equipped to deal with the situation- it just escalated out of control due to other influences (such as being assaulted.)
To be technical, you could say he was precisely equipped, in all aspects, to deal with the situation exactly as it played out. What would you say if everything was identical in action to what Zimmerman states (and the evidence validates) but Zimmerman didn't have a weapon and got his head cracked and died?
Concerned sure. Enough to assault someone? No indeed. BTW, Zimmerman's weapon was holstered in his waistband- so what weapon was he going for in his pocket?
BTW, Dee Dee's story (the initial release in which she states Trayvon said he wanted to go see 'what his deal was') doesn't help the whole 'Trayvon didn't hit him in anger' story, neither does him starting to approach then turning away from Zimmerman's truck while Zimmerman was on the phone with dispatch (this validates what he told Dee Dee.)
It's only unknown to those who don't follow the evidence. To those who follow the evidence, it doesn't really matter what Zimmerman says because the evidence shows the story, but luckily the evidence aligns with what Zimmerman says. To those who immediately want to believe Trayvon was a good boy, and this was all Zimmerman's fault- they make up whatever they need to in order to validate that thought in their head, and ignore the evidence.
Just one question for you in a similar note- can you explain to me how a 17 year old kid in an unfamiliar neighborhood, who supposedly (based on your statements) is concerned or afraid of someone following him, instead of running to the residence he is staying OR hanging up from his girlfriend to call 911, manages to meet up with Zimmerman in the exact location that Zimmerman was giving dispatch, a good 2 minutes AFTER he originally passed that location? (Trayvon was ahead of Zimmerman, Zimmerman lost sight of him and got out of his truck... was still behind Trayvon while giving dispatch the description of his location then having dispatch tell the cop to call him... etc.) So how did the incident occur in the IMMEDIATE vicinity when the residence was less than 30 seconds away?
Please explain that to me.
Surrounding his actions while disregarding the evidence that shows it was self defense. They don't care- VIDEO could come out from a hidden camera that shows Zimmerman lost in the clouds waiting on the cops and Trayvon run up and deck him, and people STILL WOULDN'T CARE.
The only thing Zimmerman did wrong in this situation was to make stupid (but legal) choices. I can't help it that the evidence validates that Zimmerman was struck, Trayvon wasn't, so that ONLY leaves the possibility that Trayvon struck first.
Excellent summary of the facts in your post WMG-21, unfortunately it's not surprising that even with evidence, you find people making stuff up to have the case fit what they want it to be.
For one to be able to say "I was hit thus was defending myself" they must be able to show proof they were hit. For someone to be able to claim self defense, they must show a reasonable threat to their safety or life. What kind of hit would you think would be reasonably believed to be a threat that would not leave a bruise? By the way- you must meet force with force, so if someone slaps you you cannot lay them out. Do you think Soldiers who are spat on while coming home have legal grounds to lay waste to the person 'hitting' them with spit?
Bruising develops generally in minutes- faster the faster your heart is beating. How fast do you think the heart beats in a fight, when your adrenaline is pumping? Also where is the information that Zimmerman's eyes weren't black until the next day? FYI, bruising isn't the only indication of impact for a medical examiner.
It's been about a week, if that.
FYI, since you don't actually know the facts of the case- the POLICE wanted to arrest and charge him with negligent homicide or manslaughter (don't remember which was WRITTEN ON THE POLICE AFFIDAVIT) but the DA said "Nope, it's self defense, let him go." The cops were just set up as the fall group so the political figures (DA, etc) didn't get so soiled.
This is the second most ignorant statement I've seen from you- the first being the cops put the button in his pocket instead of a bag (I wonder why they didn't also put his cellphone back in his pocket??)
How many times did he turn himself in for arrest compared to how many times the cops had to go looking for him? How many times did he skip country with his extra passport instead of turning it in to his attorney when he found it?
Whatever physical altercations you are referring to you had as a CHILD are NOT the same thing as two 'grown men' throwing punches at each other.
So he's got eyes in the back of his head (since he saw him), stopped to let Zimmerman catch up to him, then turns around and makes HIS comment, giving Zimmerman ~5 seconds to reply before the fight starts. If this were the case, he would have said something to Dee Dee before it started. What I find funny is that he hadn't mentioned anything else to Dee Dee about Zimmerman after Zimmerman lost Trayvon Could that be because she told him to run and he didn't want to, so he decided not to tell her so she wouldn't badger him?
Goes to show he doesn't like to follow the rules (or at the least, has little to no compunction about breaking them.) which it's reasonable to believe someone who has shown habits for breaking the rules wouldn't have a problem with breaking a rule and assaulting someone.
So what you're telling us is that it's absolutely impossible for you to take an objective look at this case- you're going with Trayvon no matter what the facts show or the proof verifies. You wouldn't even admit that there is questionable information from the Trayvon side- to include his own FATHER denying it was Trayvon's voice on the recording- before he knew the specifics.
your personal attacks don't validate your comment in the slightest.
unless geoz asked trayvon "what are you doing around here?" in an easy light-hearted inquisitive manner (which only a "DUMB@!$%#"...your word...would believe), how can ordering trayvon to explain to him why he was there, not be considered taking an authoritative role especially having just reported trayvon as acting "suspicious"?
Certainly not, but given the extent of the assault, and the suggestion that Zimmerman purposefully went out of his way to kill this young man, then you would have to conclude that any purported assault initiated by Zimmerman would have resulted in traumatic injury to Martin. The fact that all of the injuries sustained in the fight are Zimmerman's, that evidence corroborates his claim that he was assaulted and reacted to that assault. I'm not saying definitively that it couldn't have happened another way, just that the evidence (to date) supports Zimmerman's claim rather than undermines it. So, it is evidence in his favor.
My 'personal attacks' were a reply to those used against me. They weren't meant to validate comments- not like mine need validating.
I bet you're one of those people that if a cop walks up to you and asks you a question, you think you are legally required to respond (Completely different from a cop stopping you for speeding and asking for your license.) Your definition of authoritative and the legal definition are two entirely different things. Go do some more research on how the LAW works before you post here about legal issues.
Here's a hint- a question is a question. TELLING Trayvon to leave, FORCIBLY removing him etc, is considered authority stances. Asking why someone is there is not.
And to everyone except for the thick-headed two, apologies for the mile long post. I didn't realize it was that long.
ZANITH
lets make this clear, either you are a renter or a owner, IF your an owner you must not know your rights of your own property. And if your a renter then you must have a bad memory of WHEN you moved in you signed a an agreement to abide by the BOOK THEY GAVE you on there building polices.
If your an owner then TRY to recall why your an owner, BECAUSE YOU DONT WANT THE GOVERMENT to dicate what goes on in your living space which you pay taxes on. thus SINCE YOUR APPEARING TO ACT THICK--
if you throw a house party and the people you invite brings someone you dont know, CAN THAT PERSON TELL YOUR GUESTS WHAT TO DO---NOPE!
if that person asks what another person is doing at the party and tells them to leave CAN THEY DO THAT---NOPE
if your friend tells another person that they can pee in your bushes -- CAN THEY DO THAT.
NOW HERES THE TRICKY PART---can you answer why they cant------ill make it simple for you!!! because ITS PRIVATE PROPERTY-- yours and you didnt give permission for your friend or his buddy to tell your guess what they can and cant do.
But since your going to say THAT DOESNT APPLY then add a guest house on the property of your huge land area and that person pays you money to stay there. ZANITH did you tell them anything or did you do what responsible people do and let that person know what they can and cant do while out in the yard and in your house and the guest house.
So lets try it again, zimmerman owns a town home and when he moved in HE GOT A HOUSING BOOK FILLED with code of conduct, HERE one i found!!
http://www.tlc-hoa.org//wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Rules-Regulations-searchable.pdf
YOU DONT GET IT, zimmerman CANT ASK ANYONE ANYTHING, he is not security which is a person UNDER CONTRACT to uphold the land owners expecatations and has legal binding to do so.
the on duty mangers also reserves that rights.
YOUR COP example is flawed because he could not COME on to private property with out a complaintant unless he WITNESSES criminal act with his own eyes because the search and seizure and goverment intrustion amendments dont allow HIM to as a agent of the GOVERMENT.
YOU might not like that but there are enough examples of where THIS IS TRUE , not because i type it. this is that moment where you LEARN TO ADD TO THE GRAY MATTER and not make this IM RIGHT YOUR WRONG-- this is the benifits of a democratic soceity.
that for example police need a warrant to search items with in someone care if it is considered eveidence, but when you go to a store, the security can check your bag and if you dont want to show them your reciept or the bag, you wont be allowed to leave.
another example is people kicked out of places, the reason they may get kicked out of a private property establishment might not be LAW VOILATION in a public place but it is a CODE OF CONDUCT of the place that persons being removed from, like a movie THEATER.
if some dude gets loud during batman and they throw him out, for distubing others they can do that. but if the movie was in a public park an officer, unless he was a witness would need a citizens arrest form or mutliple witness to arrest via citation or jail for disorderly conduct.
SO again zimmerman did not have any authoritiative power to stop anyone for anyreason.
and by the way-- the cops minus him killing martin would have maybe had martin be present and after asking zimmerman,
1. what crime do you a ledge
2. are you a manager or security
3. do you have suspect information linking him to a buglary
SO REMEMBER the 2nd degree murder statute is about WHO IS RESPONSIBLE for the death of another, and if you choose to be a fool to think that AUTHORITATIVE POWER of land rights wont matter, then i sure would like to know where you live so i can hang out at your next party and ask people what there doing there.
sheesh
it comes down to respecting where you live and being a smart gun owner that knows that conflict is to be avoided at all cost and having a reasonable set that says>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its 7 pm in the evening and i cant say he is not a guest but i also haven't seem him do anything wrong, so instead of getting yelled at by my wife I BETTER TAKE MY ASS TO TARGET!!!
i just read some of the attacks on you and i see now you were just 'syg.' i'll stay out of it.
since i haven't made any personal attacks on you yet, am i correct that you weren't referring to me as one of the thick-head two?
first of all 'cifrommn' #1.71 was describing geoz's 'manner' as being authoritative not that he was actually in a legal role of authority.
by the way, authoritative is not limited to a legal definition ie: domineering, imposing, entitled to obedience (webster thesaurus). geoz demand to know what trayvon was "doing around here?" was not just a question which one may not feel 'entitled' to have an answered. there's not the slimmest doubt that geoz felt 'entitled to obedience' when he asked trayvon what he was doing there.
CJ
Property renter = temporary property owner with most of the authority of the owner. Renters can't sell the property and depending on the lease agreement may not be able to sublet. The Owner has limited access while the property is leased out... even if the rent/lease is not paid on time, based on the terms of the lease. I am speaking of a residential lease not commercial.
Guests are just that guests. They are there at the invite of the (Renter)Owner. They may have restrictions such as must be accompanied by the owner in certain areas. Guests have no authority/power.
The (renter)owner is responsible for their guests and the guests actions. A guest is responsible for themselves(and their children/family). They have no authority/power (other than for their children/familiy)
As to the open to the pubic private property or truly public (owned by all) venues as you stated the person observing disturbances would need to get police involved. The police could simply act as referees and ask both parties to leave or if there is an owner/manager/official present a trespass citation could be issued. Trespass laws vary by state so I won't get overly specific other than the citation serves as a notice that someones presence is not permitted/desired now or in the future. Generally police will not issue a trespass citation unless the complainant brings the subject up. Note: George would most likely NOT have legal authority to swear out a trespass citation given the circumstances of Feb 26, 2012 based on what we know, even if Trayvon were NOT a guest George most likely would not have LEGAL authority to so other than his specific property.
Neighbors have no LEGAL obligation to take responsibility for their neighbors or neighborhood but good neighbors STEP UP. That stepping up could be as simple as being peaceful and quiet to furthering peace and quiet in the neighborhood. A good neighbor could also be called a concerned citizen. Concerned about maintaining peace, quiet and good order. That generally means they are involved in the goings on of the neighborhood. Knowing who lives there and when things or people look out of place. That may take on challenging (verbally as a guard might do) or investigating (closer observation or staring) people or things that look out of place. When those people or things don't "pass muster" action may be necessary.. such as calling 9-1-1 for appropriate response. That could be fire, medical, police or whatever service is necessary. Further action or involvement all depends on the situation and the comfort level of the individual person. There may also be legal responsibility attached at a certain point. Observing an accident in most states attaches a legal responsibility to render aid... generally calling authorities and remaining on scene. Further action is generally protected by good Samaritan laws, to encourage good neighbors, but is not mandated. Being a member of certain professions muddies legal issues under good Samaritan laws: EMS, DR, Nurse, Fire, Police, etc.
irene46
By that same "definition" that would make Trayvons statement authoritative as well. "demanding or feeling entitled to an answer"
TRUST
i am not sure why your telling me something, i have already explained several times. It would be better served if you CALL THEM OUT By NAME and let them know that what i know, and have shared is correct, vs your RETYPING what i have provided is clear to me but not to others.
after reading your comment, it can be concluded that zimmermans right to take a authoritative action based on his suspicions ended at his OWN PROPERTY line and thus calling the police was the right step but NOT WAITING FOR them was not illegal but not with in his rights as a non employee of twin lakes condos.
This point will be one that will be provided to the jury as one of the contributing factors ignored by zimmerman that, interferes with those choosing to be left alone because they are in a gated community which is a benefit of being on private property.
thanks for confirming that point that others want to disregard.
Question 1 will be where his property line ends.. his yard or the perimeter of RTL, under Florida law and based on the deed. Using the phrase "within his rights" muddies things. He has the 1st Amendment Right of Free speech. He can ask just about anyone anything. While not waiting may or may not have been the "right" thing it was STUPID not to do so. Again there are no laws, outside of nature, against stupid.
No question his being stupid will (should) be a minor factor. The jury will be presented a case based on the events and relevant laws. FL Statute 776 (and all the subsections) will be up first. 2nd degree murder will be the focus if 776 doesn't kick this to the curb. The question under 2nd degree murder will be if the circumstances, including George being stupid, meet the statute requirement for the charge of 2nd degree murder. MOST Martin camp supporters on these boards tend to agree 2nd degree murder is a bar that won't be reached with the given information we have so far.
Repeating myself here. Has ANYONE found additional charges against GEORGE? So far all I have found is a single count. That count is 2nd degree murder with supporting descriptions. Included in the support is the FL Statute 775, 10-20-life enhancement, for using a gun which seems NOT to be applicable as 775 states in that statute that if the gun was the primary reason of the first charge it cannot be used to enhance the sentence. Links please to any additional charges.
TRUST
free speech is a PUBLIC RIGHT not guaranteed on private property. YOU GUYS CANT HELP YOURSELVES! So yes zimmerman cant just walk up to anyone and say anything when the reason is for authoritative reasons again because ---AS HAS BEEN POST --- he does not work or is employed by twin lakes thus his only avenue to deal with his OWN suspicions was to call and wait for the police or get the on-site manager.
In its totality, the First Amendment ensures every American that the Government is prohibited from infringing upon a citizen's right to the free practice of religion, the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the right to peaceful assembly, and the right to petition the government.
These listed rights supply the framework for the liberties on which America was built, and allow its citizens to make their voices heard, for better or for worse. The First Amendment's protection of the freedom of expression allows us to lawfully voice opposition to the President, practice Scientology, and even burn the American flag in protest.
However, with these liberties come some restrictions. The First Amendment guarantees the right of free expression only on public property.
Situated at the other end of the spectrum, opposite the traditional public forum, lays nonpublic property. Nonpublic property is typically residential property that has no connection to the government and is not open for use to the general public. Usually, property classified as such provides no free speech rights to the public.
have you read the statute for 2nd degree murder- again yes being stupid doesn't help but all that has to be meet as a burden for the state is WHO is responsible for martins death. thus with the lies and now having to defend against his GOD PLAN the jury will have a hard time finding information that might give zimmerman an out.
TRUST
free speech is a PUBLIC RIGHT not guaranteed on private property. YOU GUYS CANT HELP YOURSELVES! So yes zimmerman cant just walk up to anyone and say anything when the reason is for authoritative reasons again because ---AS HAS BEEN POST --- he does not work or is employed by twin lakes thus his only avenue to deal with his OWN suspicions was to call and wait for the police or get the on-site manager.
In its totality, the First Amendment ensures every American that the Government is prohibited from infringing upon a citizen's right to the free practice of religion, the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the right to peaceful assembly, and the right to petition the government.
These listed rights supply the framework for the liberties on which America was built, and allow its citizens to make their voices heard, for better or for worse. The First Amendment's protection of the freedom of expression allows us to lawfully voice opposition to the President, practice Scientology, and even burn the American flag in protest.
However, with these liberties come some restrictions. The First Amendment guarantees the right of free expression only on public property.
Situated at the other end of the spectrum, opposite the traditional public forum, lays nonpublic property. Nonpublic property is typically residential property that has no connection to the government and is not open for use to the general public. Usually, property classified as such provides no free speech rights to the public.
have you read the statute for 2nd degree murder- again yes being stupid doesn't help but all that has to be meet as a burden for the state is WHO is responsible for martins death. thus with the lies and now having to defend against his GOD PLAN the jury will have a hard time finding information that might give zimmerman an out.
sorry go back to grade school. 1st Amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right. Guaranteed everywhere in the USA with few limitations.
As has been correctly stated by both sides of this topic ... ANYONE can ask ANYONE anything they choose... it is their Right under free speech. There is no responsibility for the person(s) asked to respond nor for the person asking to EXPECT an answer or any particular response. The only legal response though would be with words not physical contact.
In FLORIDA it requires more than just being responsible... manslaughter has that low bar. 2nd degree has that whole depraved indifference going on. If it were solely "who is responsible for death" then every DUI death would result in 2nd degree murder rather than vehicular homicide or manslaughter ... and the argument could be easily made that being drunk behind the wheel is depraved indifference.
do you really want to argue the "Gods Plan"? Especially after the parents response? When you invoke it wasn't "Gods plan" you are sort of shooting yourself in the head. A true believer would have to accept that it WAS "Gods Plan" as are all things. Since we are playing the woulda, coulda, should game with "Gods Plan", perhaps it IS "Gods Plan" if to no other degree than to open up the whole racial relations discussion? Perhaps it IS "Gods Plan" to expose the idiots who wrote SYG for what they are? Do YOU claim to KNOW "Gods Plan"? That debate is honestly a non stater outside of a religious discussion or setting. We could even debate WHICH GOD or flavor of "religion" if you want to go down THAT track.
exactly right. that's why a mature person would have answered trayvon realizing his demand was out of concern for being followed. this would have eased the situation since trayvon was not a gangbanger that was "up to no good". why would one feel obligated to tell a perfect stranger why they were in a particular area? responding with a demand of his own, without identifying himself is a totally lack of social skills to put it mildly.
TRUST
why DO YOU INSIST on appearing to want to be a fool, i RESPECTFULLY posted the last comments of various sources allowing you to see WHAT the law does on PRIVATE PROPERTY - can you not read.
this is not about ME POSTING SOMETHING for you to DISREGARD because i posted it.
YOUR APPEARING TI CHOOSE TO BE THICK HEADED, i think you live in a sad world when you cant ACT like you can acknowledge something=JUST BECAUSE someone else corrects you.
THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMENDMENTS is all about THE PUBLIC'S RIGHTS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY and when things happen on PRIVATE PROPERTY not owned by the governments THOSE are rights are no guaranteed.
Now if you have a COMPLEX that makes you think that IF YOU REPLY that means you right then again refer to the FOOL PART.
And to prove my point, you used the word INDIVIDUAL.
So lets ONCE AGAIN sink your ship again on this,
your an INDIVIDUAL that owns a home.
your an individual that doesnt like swear words in your home
your an individual that has a guest and his buddy over
your an individual that hears this BUDDY swear every other word.
your an individual that tells your guest to tell his buddy he cant swear in your house.
your an individual that heres your guest tell that buddy to stop swearing in your house.
your an individual thats once again heres the same conduct from this buddy in his need to disregard what you expect on your property while he VOLUNTARILY walked onto it.
your an individual that then walks up to the buddy and tells him that swearing is not allowed in your home.
your an individual that then advises the buddy that if he wants to stay he needs to quit swearing.
your an individual that after visiting with others in your home the buddy is still swearing.
your an individual that then tell the buddy he has to leave your property.
your an individual that then has the buddy say to you "NOPE I DONT NEED TO BECAUSE I HAVE MY 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHTS"
your an individual that says OK BUDDY your right , please keep swearing in my house on my property because YOU HAVE THAT RIGHT --really trust really.
ANYONE ELSE THAT READS THE ABOVE WILL GET THE POINT-- IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO THEN >>>>>YOUR MENTALITY IS THE SAME AS ZIMMERMANS,
because you really think rules and laws and such don't apply to you and thats why he is in the mess he is in.
I find it hard to respect my fellow citizens who dont know the basic concept of how our democratic society works over land rights ---WHICH is the reason (historically ) WE GOT ON A BOAT ALL THOSE years ago and came to America(why did we get on a boat -trust HINT- over land rights!!)
I would be a fool If I believed all that you posted. I will choose what to IGNORE of my own free will. You think yourself someone special who is ENTITLED to be listened to.
You appear to be full of yourself. I choose to not correct over HALF of your comments because most KNOW you are wrong.
That comment in and of itself shows your IGNORANCE. The constitution is about MUCH more than public rights on any property. It has everything to do about the organization of this great nation and defining the LIMITATIONS of Government on the people. Most 5th graders can tell you that. I'll give you the benefit of some keyboarding errors but READ what you just posted and put it in English please because it appears to be a jumble of at least 3 thoughts.
OMG you FINALLY used YOUR in the correct way. 14 times you use your when it should be you're or you are.
because you really think rules and laws and such don't apply to you and thats why he is in the mess he is in.
Actually I have been arguing all along that this case needs to be based on LAW rather than the emotional knee jerk pseudo beliefs of what people think is the law.
I find it impossible to respect people who should KNOW the laws, you did claim to be a police officer, and have not a CLUE what the Constitution, Bill of Rights and rest of the Amendments to the Constitution are about.
I don't see anything about PROPERTY so far. Happy reading.
Really? Nothing to do with freedom of religion or a need to find new riches and resources? Maybe you are reading a Politically Correct history book that has been approved by the Board of Education from Texas.
irene46
No one ever claimed George was "mature". We now know Trayvon was not a gangbanger but if in fact he responded to a QUESTION with physical violence then he was no more mature than George and was acting like a "tough guy" which is in all likelyhood what got him killed. I think they both, like many under the age of 30 today, lacked social skills. Most under that age think social interaction is having a group chat and posting to FB.
well, you don't mean to say. imagine a youth barely 17 years old reacting in an immature way. but my stance is and always will be, trayvon was attempting to either disarm geoz or more than likely attempting to stop him from drawing a weapon. since this mentally ill-equipped party carrying a put him in the situation where he felt he had to protect himself, he ended up being killed.
hmm, i'll admit 28 y/o is not what it used to be; but the 28 y/o's i know (and younger) possess enough social skills to identify themselves had they taken it upon themselves to act as neighborhood protectors.
I've met my share of those who no matter the miles under their feet still should not have a license to leave home. Just read some of the articles on nbcnew.com and you know the types I am talking about.
We can go rounds on what George was reaching for. No EVIDENCE one way or the other.
Nothing against you irene... this whole dance is getting old... the same arguments and speculation when the case will be settled in a criminal court based on the evidence and laws. I've even given up on a good dog and pony show due to what we know so far. I even doubt if there will be a memorable one liner, "if it don't fit you must acquit". I was hoping for an august trial or at least an syg hearing... it now looks like april or later of next year.
I wonder if nbcnews, and the rest of the media, can find a way to milk this much further? I think we are out of dirt on everyone unless we dig it up on O'Mara, Corey, or de la Ronda.
You aren't correct, and my apologies for it- while I do believe you are being thick headed regarding the facts and information in the case (and how the law applies) I don't usually post my opinions in such a manner unless prompted. You didn't prompt, so didn't deserve to have it posted. Sorry.
Whatever Zimmerman felt entitled to doesn't matter. He phrased it as a question, and him asking was perfectly within his legal rights to do such. Trayvon had the right to reply or not- but he did not have the right to assault Zimmerman unless it was in self defense- which as we've went over numerous times, have fun proving that without any marks or defensive wounds on Trayvon.
I was going to go off on how IF this were the case, how it would impact the OTHER freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights- just to show how ignorant the statement is... But I really don't need to.
Coming from a 28 year old, I can't even come close to explaining what I would do in that situation- because I wouldn't have ever let the situation get to that point in the first place (re: I wouldn't have gotten out of my vehicle unless I saw an actual threat to someone else, such as if the person were beating on another, breaking into a home where I knew people currently were, etc.) Otherwise, I would have called the cops on my way out the gate and let them know.
But that's just me and how I feel about it- not the ONLY lawful way, just one of many.
Precisely- and not like asking a question in an authoritative manner would change the fact that it is still just a question.
I agree this is getting old- I've been on these articles for awhile now, and it always seems like pretty much the same arguments being regurgitated without too much change. I was wondering if they were going to do a SYG hearing... But I'm not 100% sure what the case is regarding this (I'm sure I read that they had the option of presenting the case to the judge to see if SYG would hold, but chances are because of the publicity that has already been shot down.)
Sure they will- they'll be lame about it of course, at least until the trial commences- just because no one wants to hear about it doesn't stop them from making it front page 'news' unfortunately. I'm sure once the trial is over, they'll start on an entirely new tangent of milking this case- ESPECIALLY if Zimmerman is acquitted due to SYG, they'll have a field day whipping the ignorant masses up into a frenzy. Violence makes better news than peace, ya know.
Out of curiosity, are you current or former military? Only time I've ever seen/heard the dog and pony show comment is from the service, so was just wondering. I'm sure it's used elsewhere- but I just don't know where.
TRUST
try not to feel like YOUR WINNING the war of words just because nobody has told you that your wrong.
and i absolutely know it wouldnt matter if they did. YOUR NEED TO always find a reason to continue to LIE about what is fact vs fiction works for you.
your inability to GOOGLE the same information, to READ A DAM AMENDMENT and also act like a informed citizen escapes you, just so you dont have to be honest with your self.
I AM GLAD that works for you at the end of a dead post, because again, anyone with half a brain knows that THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN what works in the public based on our laws doesn't always work on private property.
the fact that you would have to be strapped to chair and dropped into a lecture on constitutional law and would hear it straight from the most profound scholar -- wouldnt matter based on your need to feel right.
and thats too bad for you. i always find it funny that YOUR WILLING to keep spinning this enough to not even take time to APPARENTLY reflect about how this ZIMMERMAN CASE is relative to your own personal life , just shows me and others who READ BUT CHOOSE not to reply to your post , how u really have no integrity and in the end.
we all know the truth, which involves all that you keep disregarding on how this country works by laws and how private property works by rules and expectations.
zanilth
Yes prior service. Though dog and pony has been used in many places I have worked by non military types.
Agreed. I think MOST people wouldn't do what George did but can see themselves in the situation he is in now. Even if some of us might have gotten out to see where he went we wouldn't allow Trayvon to sneak up on us, which appears to be what happened.
cjfromMN
Perhaps you are a fanboi of charlie sheen I certainly am not. While I don't care for him at least he knows how to spell you're.
Now you are omniscient? Attributing yourself with godlike powers? Just who is full of themselves?
I don't have a need to google the Bill of Rights... I have copies and have read and studied them for years. Are you speaking of a beaver dam or the Hoover dam amendment? I don't recall those being part of the Constitution.
As I stated before ... The constitution and amendments work EVERYWHERE in the USA. Unless one is a convicted felon or the Patriot Act has usurped the constitution all US Citizens are entitled to them in all places with few limitations... (yelling fire in a theater type things)
Actually I would gladly hear it from a scholar... not an extreme liberal or conservative but someone who hadn't twisted the lecture with their own speculation and agenda. Too bad you couldn't sit through that same lecture without being nailed to the chair and a gun to your head.
I think some are making this bigger than it is. I reflect that George could be anyone who acted within the law that MOB mentality wants to crucify because they don't like the way the law is written. Neither this case nor the shooting in CO will change the overall views on firearms. With just a little luck FL will review statute 776 and make some necessary word changes or put into the language what escalation of deadly force is rather than leave it open. They will also amend the training requirements for CCW to include what escalation means. This case may involve the definition of where private property lines are in an hoa but wont change any of that... it will serve to educate everyone to some degree... I could be wrong on where that line is but so could you. Neither of us live in FL nor did we study property law there.
Apparently we have different views on what the truth is about how and why the country was founded and works. You appear to think you speak for everyone. Breaking news, you don't. I agree that this country is supposed to work based on laws... apparently many in the Martin camp feel only those laws that they agree to until they take the law into their own hands.
truth
you always have something to say BUT NEVER ANY SUBSTANCE TO REFUTE anything at all.
again you just cant keep it simple because if you did, you would have nothing to say because the information independant of me shows to be the truth.
again its private property and there are NO EXPECTATIONS OF RIGHTS and its to bad that your a coward in reply that cant admit that, which is why you need to cut and paste everything as a great way to divert and spread what is simple and clear.
YOU NEED TO LIE ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS IS DOWN RIGHT -SAD.
again if you think the zimmerman action is correct then i am not sure how you own anything since it all belongs to the government---right! ugh
What are you talking about?
Again what are you speaking about or attempting to claim? The only amendment in the 1st ten regarding private property would be the 3rd. "No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." No persons rights begin or end at A property line. They apply to ALL CITIZENS within US Borders... and are generally applied to non citizens as well.
I would be a coward if I simply bowed down to you for calling me a liar and coward. Bullying may work in your job with some individuals but that doesn't make you right. You SERIOUSLY need to get with your superiors and get an education on Constitutional Rights. As a PEACE officer you are putting your fellow "officers" at risk.
Would this be the "union" you belong to? http://www.mppoa.com/home.php
That would be a simple yes that is the union you were referring to or no and provide a link to the one you are speaking of.
trust
again your a coward because you cant admit that freedom of speech is not a right gaurentted on private property-- and you know it and i know it, because not only did i say that, the supreme court has said that, i cut and pasted it for you--but you want to keep thinking #3 extends to the common area of the twin lakes OWNED property vs zimmerman property.
it doesnt because he wasnt on his own property. in the end, you back where you started, acting as though your ability to cut and paste changes the parmeters of this event. it doesnt.
the ablity for people to have there rights intact does not exist on private property in referance to how the OWNERSHIP maintains that property because the key comes down to VOLUNTARY choice.
for you to be a fool to say YEP THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE AMENDEMENT doesnt applyto private property,then smart ass why does the government need a warrant to come in your house.
then why do you have to show your reciept at the exit to a store or have a bag checked at large chain store like best buy---
i know your never answer those straight because then you would have to just accept what has been stated.
that rights are not gaurentted on private property
its even clear here in this event, minus zimmerman killing the kid,=HOW would a trespass work if martin wasnt a guest---
do you even know? because if you did it would be another time where YOU would see that the rights dont extend onto private property.
That would be the 4th not the 3rd. And I agree it does apply. I misspoke and there are two.
You seem to have missed the question I had for you about your union.
its even clear here in this event, minus zimmerman killing the kid,=HOW would a trespass work if martin wasnt a guest---
I already stated that the POLICE would escort Trayvon off the property if he could not prove he were a guest since a resident had a concern (felt he was suspicious). Since George would probably NOT understand that he could contact the resident HOA or Property management and take it to the reading of Trespass... presuming that is how FLORIDA does their routine. That is how it works in CA, CO, HI, OH and PA. As a property owner/renter or representative I would have police witness my reading of the citation to the unwanted guest they would log and file it and escort the person off property. In this instance there is a possibility that the police would accept George doing just that as they recognized him as a NW Captain... there would be legal flaws in doing that but you asked what would have happened had George not shot him and he could not prove he were a guest. ODDS are that the martins would contest the citation and it would be set aside both because he could eventually prove he was a guest. There would also be the question... still to be answered by the court... as to where the property line was for George based on the specific legal standing at RTL.
TRUST
What do you think the point of that was, to prove to you that , as much as you hate to admit it, that private property is not dictated by public law.
The Mn peace officers association is a good group and the http://www.mnpera.org/ is a better one.
The https://dps.mn.gov/entity/post/Pages/default.aspx and these people work hard to make sure everyones on the same page.
As far as the trespass goes, it also proves the point that the government has to abide by its law, and that any power to do something with martin comes from the MGMTS right of authority while on there property and the police have no ability to do anything to martin IF management didnt want him there because he committed no criminal act.
AGAIN proving that your public law concept is flawed as expressed earlier.
The Mn peace officers association is a good group and the http://www.mnpera.org/ is a better one.
The https://dps.mn.gov/entity/post/Pages/default.aspx and these people work hard to make sure everyones on the same page.
Again my specific question is WHICH one do you belong to and what is your ACTUAL position... peace officer, police officer, corrections officer, or security guard. I doubt it is the third, even though some public housing can be rougher then jail/prison.
TRUST
I have my police license from working for a small suburb in Ramsey county, until my twins mother died a unexpected death that they didn't adjust well to.
so to focus on them and give them more time, i was able to get into the medium security corrections jail in lino lakes, mn until anoka county cut the budget.
i work under my police license # working a security contract in public housing for skyline towers, st paul and mpls grain exchange which houses the hennipen country sheriffs detective offices.
I belong to both because one deals with police issues and representation and one deals with retirement of public employees from all work sectors of MN. (i.e. teachers, city county and state workers,
so basically Public Employees Retirement System just consolidated across the state rather than 20 (or more) different groups.
Condolences on your loss btw.
I'm hoping we can tone down the personal attacks here... We simply disagree on what the particulars of the law... which do vary by state.
Just wanted to interject that 1st amendment rights and private property is a gray area where the State supreme courts have rules one way in certain circumstances, but another in different circumstances. Consider the following:
And here's a pretty decent essay on the subject, if you have a few minutes to read it over. It covers some of the issues you two were, ahem, "discussing."
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/property-rights-and-the-first-amendment/
To the matter at hand, I think whether or not George or Trayvon had 1st amendment privileges is obvious, however, in that the HOA did not specifically forbid sidewalk conversation. There's probably something in there about noise disturbances and/or large gatherings being subject to certain restrictions, but I doubt very highly that there's anything specifically banning two individuals from speaking to one another in the common area between condos. Unless that policy is written into the HOA agreements and/or the actual property owner specifically banned it verbally, then the right is presumed. So, the whole strawman argument about whether or not they had the "right" to speak to one another, independent of whether or not that exchange resulted in physical conflict, has been effectively scattered by the flying monkeys and we can move on.
Has anyone noticed the words that the Zimmerman posters use to attack the Trayvon advocates?
Since the beginning of June the main focus on Zimmerman has been his credibility issues. Thus, the posters for Zimmerman now are attacking with words like "liar" , "lie", and "deceive".
When the main focus on Zimmerman was the question as to whether or not he used racial profiling as a watch captain, the posters on the vine thread used words related to that quality to attack posters they did not agree with.
VERY INTERESTING, I think.
.
This, I have noticed has caused some Trayvon advocates to just throw those words back at the Zimmerman fans in their rebuttals--------- so often all you see going on are these attacks going back and forth during which time the people posting are distracted from the REAL message they originally wanted to get out to the general audience.
By the way, for those of you who do not know, if a comment is collapsed (usually by those who disagree with the comment)------
.
You can click on the words........."comment collapsed by community" ...........and see that comment.
Why do you categorise either pro Treyvon or pro Zimmerman? None of were there and some of us are after the FACTS only. I say that if the M.E. says Z fired while on his back UP into Treyvon he will not be found guilty. Z is a world class dumbass but that is not against the law.
because they, themselves, do.
yahtc
I'm sure you were one of the fools that allowed yourself to be duped into believing Zimmerman didn't sustain injuries because of the grainy glaring video.
You are intent on convincing the public Zimmerman is guilty of murder 2. Why? You've gone to great lengths, manipulating and misusing posts, ignoring how the law works, anything you can think of. You persist on ignoring supportive and colloberative evidence.
Your efforts to convict a man without due processin the court of public opinion is bording on frenzy.
I came on here just now to laugh at the people who would spend time debating a second hand information discussing what they think is to be found in the latestest released discovery, rather than await the release of it to the public and discussing the original.
What do I find? I find a frenzied posters intent on convicting a man in court of public opinion without due process and a verbal attack on anyone that doesn't agree with the poster.
.
See post #2
@YAHTC
not relevant, since GZ was providing an ESTIMATE the NEXT DAY and it was DARK and not well lit when it actually happened
doesn't witness 16(the 2 ladies) put zimmerman on top of trayvon AFTER the shooting?
what is "this". do you have any real evidence that trayvon was trying to pull away?
any real evidence that trayvon was trying to flee? and again george's ESTIMATE is not going to be relevant
btw... i prefer to use words like proof or evidence rather than speculation and "fill in the blanks"
Officer Santiago wrote that he "observed a key chain lying NEAR the T portion of the walkway, a black flashlight lying on the grass just east of the key chain.
Santiago also wrote that he "noticed a black cell phone near the area of Martin"
Therefore, the key chain and the black cell phone (note: I am not talking about the headset) were at least 30 feet apart.
Conclusion:
If the fight was way down the sidewalk at the T , that is where Trayvon would have been shot based upon Zimmerman's statement that he shot Trayvon while his (Zimmerman's) head was being pounded on the sidewalk by Trayvon .
---------------Also, that tree (where GZ is standing in the video re-enactment)is located at the beginning corner of the 1st condo from the T.
Trayvon's body was located between that lst condo and the 2nd condo---about 30' feet from the keychain and location George pointed as being where he shot Trayvon because his head was being slammed on the concrete.
Thus, the keychain backs up what Zimmerman points out as to the location of where he shot Trayvon.
In the above interview George Zimmerman says that is where he got on top of Trayvon ('s body) and was holding him (body) down.
Do you agree that George's defense has a problem here?
By the way, Bobc, that keychain belonged to George.
B.O.B. isn't interested in hearing all of the inconsistencies in G man's several theories of what happened. They are too far gone believing g man has the voice of god and speaks no evil #ThrowHimUnderTheBusAlready
no
indicates where the confrontation started, nothing else.
indicates that the confrontation progressed down the T, as GZ indicated in his re-enactment
george indicated they were past the tree(down the T) when his head was being hit onto to the sidewalk, not that close to the top of the T
Yeah watch the re-enactment he said he confronted him. They walked to each other. HE punched him and then wrestled away from each other. Wow this could put them 30 feet down the T pretty easily. The keys / flashlight could have been dropped / thrown / whatever. Actually the LOCATION OF THE FIGHT proves GZ's telling. Trayvon has no reason to be there and YOU cannot explain why if he was "lost" for 2 minutes. Explain this please and I'll discuss it otherwise it sure sure seems to me someone was waiting to jump someone who just got off the phone. Not someone who was "hunting" someone down...
Correct-------and Trayvon's body was 30 feet from that location of the head hitting.
Bob - Doesn't it get old having to explain the same thing to people over and over again? Asking the same question a different way doesn't change the question. "A fanatic is one who won't change his mind and refuses to change the subject".
No-----Trayvon was TRYING to PULL AWAY from George Zimmerman---probably was facing GZ----in order to back away and escape GZ's hold (GZ probably was holding the front of Travon's sweatshirt.
.
Also, in the re-enactment, Zimmerman said he shot Trayvon while his head was being pounded.
.
Zimmerman pointed out the head pounding location. That location is 30 feet from where Trayvon's body was found.
YATHC - Actually no your completely wrong on this. Even in the re-enactment and what Frank was replaying I NEVER saw him say his head was bashed in at the top of the "T". All he said is that is where he was confronted by Trayvon (And wow witnesses who heard it confirm who's story again?)
Where did you see this because I guess I missed it. You honestly think this killer mastermind is going to screw that up if he is just lying to cover his ass?
do you mean 10 yards from the ESTIMATE he gave the next day about the incident that happened in the DARK in an area that was not very well lit?
Trying to pull away AFTER punching him in the face? Umm ok you believe what you want. Its ok I know that no matter what you think poor ol Trayvon did nothing here. I get it. God I wish a video was available so this could be put to rest. It's utterly absurd for me to think someone who confront you and then punch you and then try to run away and George Zimmerman is able to overpower him and drag him down but LOSE every aspect of that fight with no wounds to show he attempted that. (Actually no your right that does happen alot by cowards who do the knockout game. Maybe your on to something).....
It sure does, Dan!
BobC - yeah its another in the long conspiracy line. The next day he is off by 20 feet and that shows he lied. Wait didn't he get it wrong where he shot him too then? So I guess he didn't shoot him either? (Sarcasm)...
you can't convict someone on "probably", "i think" or "i speculate". you need actual evidence or witness corroboration.
@bob,
It WAS raining, but the area was well-lit as are all such communities where a lot of the people are retirees. There were street lights all along the sidewalk where Martin was killed. You can see for yourself since they are easily visible from their shadows on Google Earth. And in such a circumstance, 30 feet is a long way off. Try stepping off thirty feet and wonder if YOU would make a mistake like that.
This was cited by the one of the inconsistencies with Z's claim of self-defense.
No, dan-------Zimmerman shot Trayvon in the heart. Trayvon's body should have been the location Zimmerman point out as being where he shot Trayvon because Trayvon was pounding his head.
Bobc--------You responded to my comment--
No-----Trayvon was TRYING to PULL AWAY from George Zimmerman---probably was facing GZ----in order to back away and escape GZ's hold (GZ probably was holding the front of Travon's sweatshirt.
with
See the post above at 2:22
All pure speculation. You even admit you don't know, and that you are guessing by your use of the word "probably".
Your full of crap on that one. Any animal or human can get shot in the heart & talk, walk or run for SEVERAL seconds afterward . I have seen deer cover over a hundred yards with most of their heart blown out with a high powred rifle. They only drop dead in the movies. This ain't the movies.
YAHTC... you can point out that difference all you want, it's still not relevant... it was an ESTIMATE - 10 steps away the NEXT DAY
chris,
you must have been there that night to notice how well it was lit. we should probably leave that to the witnesses who said they couldn't see faces(why "john" changed to not knowing who was yelling for help), but could only tell that george's red shirt/coat was on the bottom
Kevin--Zimmerman says he did not let him go anywhere. Zimmerman is totally stuck in his web of lies---
.
George Zimmerman Reenacts Shooting of Treyvon Martin for Police at Crime Scene (Part 2)
.
Go to 5:58/ of 8:03 on the video-----where Zimmerman says
GZ--"After I shot him, he like sat up....
Investigator--"You're still in this position here basically...you bring(being?) him out here...You shot him so he's in the grass
GZ--"Yes, sir. He was on top of me like this and I shot him. And I didn't think I hit him 'cause he sat up and said ah.oh 'You got me. You got it. You got me' something like that. So I thought he was saying, I know you have a gun now, I heard it, I'm giving up. So I don't know if I pushed him off me or he fell off me. Either way I got on top of him and I pushed his arms apart and I said ''don't move'
Investigator--"Kinda flipped him over?
GZ--"I don't remember how I got on top of him-I'm sorry-
Investigator--"That's fine
GZ--"But I got on his back and I move his arms apart because when he was repeatedly hitting me in the face and the head, I thought he had something in his hands and so I ...just...moved his hands apart
Interviewer--"but you had him face down then?
.
.
So, you see, Zimmerman said he held Trayvon down and said "Don't move"
Is this case about a guy shooting a drug dealer?
you all have thoughtful comments and "others" to numerous to mention.
you can't convict someone on "probably", "i think" or "i speculate".
Please let me know what part of the above sentence you don't understand.(prevously submitted by a more enlightened person with an open view to BOTH sides) It's all speculation and opinion, no more no less. Of course that's your right but I find it boring and redundant. I think you've just about beaten a dead house enough to kill it again. My suggestion would be to let the court resolve this and work its justice, if that's at all possible, having been tried on the web and everywhere else and found guilty already.
you all have thoughtful comments
So I don't know if I pushed him off me or he fell off me. Either way I got on top of him and I pushed his arms apart and I said ''don't move'
Investigator--"Kinda flipped him over?
GZ--"I don't remember how I got on top of him-I'm sorry-
Where does it say that they both just swapped positions? All I see is him saying that he doesn't remember exactly how they came to be after the shot ???????????????????????
You have watched wayyyy to much Perry Mason
Like you pointed out in your post. George thought he had missed TM and that in the heat of the moment, he attempted to hold him down. After he realized he had hit TM he got up. Paramedics attempted CPR so the location may have changed where he fell. The keys and black flashlight were GZ's which proves where the confrontation started as GZ said. The Watermelon Juice ( not tea ) was in his front pocket of his hoodie along with the picture pin of his dead cousin. Note the video at the 7-11 show he was wearing it. He removed it for the fight. He had prepared to confront GZ.
Kevin----You asked---
The point is all of that happened 30 feet away from where Trayvon's body was found.
Thanks, Kevin!
SirBentley----You wrote-----
In any case GZ was holding him down after shooting him at a location 30 feet from where Trayvon's body was found!
you all have thoughtful comments
Since you bring it up.. have you noticed that from the BEGINNING the Martin camp has attacked anyone who has supported George by calling the racist, bigots, liars and that was BEFORE they had run out of facts to debate. Why bring it up now?
So now you are claiming he dragged the body to a new location before "holding him down"? Do you even READ what you type before hitting the post comment button? At least you aren't hitting the post comment & vote button like some do.
you all have thoughtful comments: You seem to be awfully invested in the outcome of this case. And apparently you also have a surprising amount of time on your hands.
Also, GZ told investigators that after shooting Trayvon, he
Well------Trayvon's hands were found tucked under his body.
No, I am pointing out that because Zimmerman said he shot Trayvon AS his head was being pounded-----Zimmerman is lying.
Because, Trayvon's body was found 30 feet south of the location Zimmerman pointed out to investigators as being where he shot Trayvon as his head was being pounded-------I speculate that Trayvon was attempted to get away from Zimmerman.
I just don't see Zimmerman's head wounds being consistant with someone getting his head "slammed" concrete over and over. He had two small cuts and barely any bruising from the picture. It looks more like he scraped it.
I have no love for Zimmerman so I am certainly not pro Zimmerman but at the same time I'd like him to get a fair trial. That's something many here do not want to see. That's sad.
I am amazed at how the media is going after Zimmerman. I thought the media was supposed to be impartial (except for the editorial pages). That's the way it was in the old days.
What I find most amazing is how much time some people (like you all have thoughtful comments) invest in every detail of a case they will not be deciding since they are not impartial. I know very little about the details of the case and do not care to. I'll let the jury do that. Besides, I have a life....and a job.
Let me repeat myself once more. If Zimmerman were also black, none of us would be commenting.
You are probably correct. The problem is that Trayvon did not try to get to safety until after he was beating Zimmerman and was subsequently shot.
AG99---You wrote---
I am an advocate for Trayvon.
Who can speak up for him if we can't? All we have is George Zimmerman's story of how things unfolded.
Trayvon is not here to challenge his story. So it is left to some of us to point out the holes in his story using the facts from the evidence that has been released so far.
30 feet is less than 5 body lengths! I think it's pretty impressive that George's memory was as accurate as it was. He was in a life or death fight in the dark and he still did a pretty good job remembering where he was.
DesertMo--As to your comment---
Icurhoods wrote a few days ago that he thought the injuries were cause this way-----
Problem is that all the "holes" poked so far are based on nothing more than speculation and emotion. Not a single "hole" can be brought up with the use of "maybe" or "probably" or "likely". Too bad convictions are based on "he may have" or "this is what probably happened".
Scubasteave--You wrote---
You forget that George's story was that he was holding Trayvon down right after shooting him------so that 30 feet is extremely significant.
.
(I have to take a lunch break, now.)
YAHTC (2.45),
Why exactly is that discrepancy more important because George says he was holding Trayvon down?
If when Zimmerman pushed Trayvon off him, Trayvon stumbled 3 steps and then fell, that would account for the 30 feet. Zimmerman could have held him down after that.
And George's re-enactment was just to provide an estimate of what happened. It wasn't supposed to have been taken as gospel.
Can it be a long lunch break?
you all have thoughtful comments
How about being an advocate for something meaningful. Those advocating for Trayvon have gotten their trail; it isn't an advocate's job to convict him or speculate on a different point of view of how the events unfolded.
There are thousands of other causes worth advocating for.
Thoughtful comments
No, thats not all we have, we have the physical evidence of injuries to one party consistent with being attacked, if GZwas attacked he had every right to defend himself, looking at the injuries what reasonable conclusion do you think a jury is going to come to. The judge is not going to let the prosecutor say "I think it could have happened this way, or it might have happened this way", if she makes an allegation as to what happened, she is going to have to prove it with evidence, and the only evidence she has points to it having happened the way Zimmerman said it happened, she cant prove otherwise, the Judge isnt going to let her say "Well I think he's lying". For those of you who say GZ shouldnt have thought his life was in danger, remember, he knew he had a gun, and if knocked out Martin would have been in control of that gun, to me that means your life is in danger.
Some info for those that believe Trayvon's body should be where George shot him: A veteran who was a friend of mine was suffering great depression and he committed suicide, shooting himself in the heart. He ran 25 feet and collapsed before he died. I asked an EMT how this was possible and he said that even though the heart is destroyed, the brain still retains enough oxygen to enable a person to function for up to 30 seconds or more. Hope this is helpful.
StevenKage------
.
George Zimmerman Reenacts Shooting of Treyvon Martin for Police at Crime Scene (Part 2)
.
Go to 5:58/ of 8:03 on the video-----where Zimmerman says
.
.
So, you see StevenKage-----George says he held Trayvon DOWN after shooting him. (So the point you make in #2.50 is moot.)
.
:)
Why be an advocate for anyone? Far more evidence will come out in court where the jurors will listen and decide. Why do you feel the need to push one side over the other when there's a process in place for determining the truth?
Sure seems strange though that the ONLY process Zimmerman used to defend himself, based on what he's said and what the evidence shows, is shoot Martin. Personally speaking, most people I know would have at least hit back before shooting someone.
YAHTC (#2.51),
From your own quote:
So Trayvon could have gotten pushed off of Zimmerman and stumbled a few steps. The quote you linked does not invalidate Steven's point from #2.50.
Scuba... Maybe Zimmernam "doesn't remember" because he's told too many lies?
Scubasteve---Wrong------You need to watch the video to see the location he was in with the investigators-----no where near the location where Trayvon's body was found.
George Zimmerman Reenacts Shooting of Treyvon Martin for Police at Crime Scene (Part 2)
.
Go to 5:58/ of 8:03 on the video
Stephen Nichols,
I never said Zimmerman wasn't lying.
I simply pointed out that the quote that "You all have thoughful comments" was basing their argument on, doesn't actually support their argument.
YAHTC (2.57)
How am I wrong? You said their location was extremely important because Zimmerman said he held Trayvon down right after he shot him.
I pointed out that that wasn't what Zimmerman said.
George Zimmerman Reenacts Shooting of Treyvon Martin for Police at Crime Scene (Part 2)
5:58/ of 8:03 on the video
Repeating the same quote doesn't change it's meaning. Zimmerman never says that Trayvon didn't move after he got shot.
In fact, Zimmerman says Trayvon was pushed or fell off him and then Zimmerman got on top of him and held him down.
Zimmerman could not have pushed Trayvon 30 feet nor could Trayvon have fallen off GZ in a sideways fall of 30 feet.
Half way through the 300pp of evidence released today is a sketch diagram of the evidence at the scene in relation to Trayvon's body with measurements. The distance is more than the 30 feet I wrote.
READ: State releases documents given to Zimmerman
yahtc,
The point I made in #2.50 is not moot. It was in response to your assertion that because Trayvon was shot in the heart, his body should be at the spot of the shooting:
"Zimmerman shot Trayvon in the heart. Trayvon's body should have been (sic) the location Zimmerman point (sic) out as being where he shot Trayvon because Trayvon was pounding his head." #2.22
I merely wanted to point out that the struggle likely continued even after George shot Trayvon. George's initial sketchy statement does not clarify if the struggle shifted from the spot of the initial shooting although its not unreasonable to assume that it might have. I've seen and been in many for real wrestling matches and my experience is they don't neatly stay in one spot. I'm sure this issue will be scrutinized throughly at trail. Until then, its not prudent to jump to conclusions which are based on incomplete evidence. Also, keep in mind that the proper mode of inquiry is not to establish a theory of the case and then try to find evidence to support it, but just the opposite: collect ALL the facts and THEN decide. Jumping to conclusions always indicates prejudice of some sort. Anyone who has determined innocence or guilt in this case based upon what is known at this point needs to relax and take off the black robe until it plays out.
No, GZ lied about shooting Trayvon while his head was being slammed on the concrete at the tree.
The body is at least 30 feet from there. Next to the body is the shell casing.
Trayvon's body is also 10 feet in on the grass toward the town houses as well as 30 feet from where Witness 6 saw the two with one on top of the other. Trayvon's body was found face down with his head pointed in the direction of north
yahtc... I know you provided a link last night to the info release.. did you read it?
Witnesses state that the body remained where it was shot.. there was only a leg twitch shortly after the shot seen by ONE witness. While it SEEMS to be a rehash of what was released before there appears to be newly released interviews that paint a clearer picture because the FBI asked the right questions instead of just asking "tell us what happened". The fight was not in ONE static location. It did go on for about 90 seconds. That is not conjecture but based on witness statements of the sound moving away or towards the different witnesses and in a left to right manner by some.
CONJECTURE ALERT---- I think George managed to set up partially and attempted to squirm out from under (that should make the martin camp happy I am describing George as a worm) as Trayvon held his head to put him back to the ground. That would even fit that fact that the lacerations were vertical and deep. That setting up was more than once. END CONJECTURE
Am I right? who knows? Plausible.. no further stretch than being knocked into a tree. It does fit with what witnesses heard and later saw.
Trust_Verify--You asked----
Yes.
I speculate that Zimmerman was knocked into a tree and then landed on his back where he said the pounding of his head occurred. Of course, we are both speculating.
The head pounding part was static.
Some witnesses saw the part after the head pounding.
George's elbow was on the ground when he shot Trayvon.
George's interviewer reported GZ's account -----"Zimmerman's elbow was on the ground at the time he fired. Martin then released his grip on Zimmerman and stated, 'you got it, ok, you got it', pivoted his body 90 degrees and laid face down on the grass. Zimmerman righted himself and grabbed Martin's hands.* Zimmerman almost immediately noticed someone with a flashlight and asked if they were the police, to which the person replied, 'No'. Zimmerman then saw a second person with a flashlight and asked if that person was the police to which the person replied, 'yes'. " (This quote is from the 300pp. of evidence released yesterday.)
.
*NOTE---Police found Martin's hands tucked under his body.
A transparent court system is the foundation of the rights of the individual. Despotic rulers fear open courts. They hate to have the common man review everything that is done to us, in our names.
Open courts, like open elections - are the only way we can be assured that the will of the people is being carried out. In almost every case of these tin-pot nations/leaders who have taken over a country, usually by force of arms. The first thing they do is hold an election... then toss out all the ballots that don't add to the count of the predetermine "winner". The recent re-election of Putin in Russia, is a prim example. Same in many of the elections in rebel regimes in South America, Africa. The Red Chinese party just cut the whole election facade out of the game. Their real leadership elections are invisible to the common citizen. The Communist party (much like the election of a new Pope), is done behind closed doors, with sequestered votes... from among the leadership (who are appointed - not elected by the common folk). Get together and decide amongst themselves - the next leader. Its a closed election.
If the prosecution is leaking all this evidence to the media it makes me wonder if they think they have such a weak case they know they will not get a conviction and are simply trying the case in the court of public opinion. It certainly seems to me there is already ample evidence no one can get a fair trial in this case due to the "leakage" and the tainting of a jury pool. Even a change of venue would be in doubt unless it were moved out of this country altogether. Again "50 shades of Justice" at work in this country.
But when Zimmermanns lawyers leak their evidence - like the video taken the next day at the scene - what does that show exactly?
Does this mean they are trying the case in the court of public opinion?
Hard to have it both ways...
It's not the prosecution "leaking" evidence...it's Florida's Sunshine law.
The evidence has to be given to the public, it's the law!
Yup. They have their hands tied and are being forced to slowly release all pertinent information..
boomer
The prosecutor has an extremely weak case, if she has a case at all, thats why she didnt take it to a Grand Jury.
That's funny, that's precisely why she didn't "need" to go before a Grand Jury...everyone knows "you can get a Grand Jury to indite a ham sandwich"...
She has the evidence to support Murder TWO!
@Steve,
A Grand Jury only hears from the prosecution and their only job is to determine if there is sufficient evidence of a crime to go to trial. In the case of a violent death, the death itself is sufficient proof of a crime. Why spend the taxpayer money to tell the Grand Jury that someone was shot so they can vote it a "true bill." My guess is that you have never been on a Grand Jury and have no idea what they do, but it is NOT a mini-trial as you seem to think. The defense is only very rarely and in extremely special circumstances allowed to address a Grand Jury --- only when they contend that there was no basis for a crime ever happening in the first place.
The prosecutor would have to produce evidence that a crime has been committed, and she really cant, thats why the first States Attorney refused the case. The evidence will show that Zimmerman was attacked, he defended himself, and that will be that.
Exactly-- and the "Stand Your Ground" law would have provided, and will provide in the current arena, the foil to the accusation. She didn't want to take it to the grand jury because there is a very strong possibility that they would have thrown out the case and invoked the protections in that law.
And that is exactly what would have been contended. No crime took place. A case of self defense.
The defense would present be allowed a position self defense. That's why no grand jury. They would have to hear both sides before issuing a "true bill".
Corey did not want to chance it. She flew solo on this one to appease the masses, hence the weakly worded charging affidavit with inuendos and inflamitory statements.
1) Grand Juries do NOT hear cases. Period. All they do is hear the prosecution's presentation that there is sufficient evidence to bring the case to indictment. The defense is only rarely allowed to present evidence. In my time on a Grand Jury and hundreds upon hundreds of cases I never saw a defense ever involved in six months of cases. In most cases the name of the offender was "John Doe or person(s) unknown".
2) Grand Juries can only vote "true bill" of "not true bill." That's it. A true bill means only that there is a reasonable expectation that a crime may have been committed. Usually in the case of a robbery, for example, a complaint by a victim is more than enough to vote a true bill against a "John Doe.". If there is any doubt, it is always a "true bill." The idea is to let the courts sort it out.
3) Grand Jury hearings are closed and kept secret. Period. A body with a hole in the heart would definitely result in a "true bill". Nothing more needs to be known by a Grand Jury. And usually there are so many cases that all you really get is a computer listing with the crime, the date and time, and most of the names are "John Doe."
4) The purpose of a Grand Jury is to screen out incompetent or malicious prosecution. It is there to keep people from suing the same person over and over to bankrupt him with legal fees or to prevent prosecutions which are really stupid. That's it.
5) Defense lawyers would vigorously oppose having to present anything to a Grand Jury because they would be giving a free peek at their strategy to the prosecution. They simply have nothing to gain and everything to lose.
6) Any state that has public prosecutors doesn't really need a grand jury. While all states have them in theory, only about half of the states still use them. It is just getting almost impossible to get people to serve for 3mos to a year. And there is really no need for Grand Juries unless a prosecutor wants to validate that a crime has occurred.
From another very commonsense standpoint:
When one person kills another it is very rare that someone is not tried for it. The reason lies not in determination of innocence or guilt, but in the statute of limitations. When a person dies there is no statute of limitations on accusations of murder.
A good example would be Laura Bush. In an automobile accident, her car struck a stopped car with an ex-boyfriend in it and the boy was killed. She was tried for some degree of manslaughter. We don't really know the disposition of the case because she was underage and the records were expunged. But the very fact that she was tried means than a political enemy of her husband cannot come back 30 or 40 years later and charge her with murder. That would be jeopardy.
I knew a woman in Virginia who shot and killed a burgler. There was a video camera showing that he came in, blocked the only door, put his hand inside his jacket and said something (there was no sound ont he video.) She shot him with a 12-guage and killed him dead. Because he was obviously threatening her and she said that he said he had a gun and there was no way for her to flee since he was blocking the only way out, it was a pretty obvious case of self-defense. But she was tried for manslaughter and found not guilty. This protected her permanently from any future prosecution for the same death. The sad thing was that her legal expenses caused her to lose her shop and the apartment above it where her family lived.
So, from a purely common sense standpoint, it is good that Zimmerman is being tried. If he is found not guilty it will protect him from future criminal lawsuits for the Martin death.
It will still be be possible for the Martin family to sue him for wrongful death in civil court. This is because the standards of evidence are different between criminal and civil cases. In a criminal case, guilt must be proved to a reasonable certainty. In a civil case, it must only be proved by a preponderance of the evidence. A good example of that was the OJ Simpson trial where he won the criminal trial but lost the civil trial. Different standards of evidence.
Chris...
Every thing you stated (very well by the way) is true and correct. I don't know how closely you are following this case. You may very well be aware of the following Just as an FYI
The major difference in this case is that
1 - almost 6 weeks had passed since the incident took place,
2 - there was wide spread Media coverage with the topic being potential self defense
3 - the lead investigator had recommended negligent manslaughter as the charge as late a 3/23/12
4 - the original DA declined to honor the Capias request citing insufficient evidence
5 - there were wide spread racial overtones alluded to (Sharpton/Jackson)
6 - the Martin Family had legal representation (they need spokespersons?)
7 -the original DA was removed and the Gov. appointed a special prosecutor, Corey
8 - the SPD did a poor job of both investigating and protecting the crime scene
9 - the Chief of Police was asked to step down,. the City of Stanford held press conferences to point
fingers
10- all of this was by now public knowledge
11- Fl. has a SYG Law which provides for immunity from arrest and prosecution in self defense claims
12- GZ was not arrested immediately as the SYG Law prevented it
13- safe to assume a Grand Jury might not be inclined to issue a true bill based on the above?
14- Corey upped the charge to 2nd degree when it was doubtful, considering the above, and the evidence
to date, that even manslaughter can be proven
15- Corey is running for re-election in several months, this is her "platform"
Lots of "ducking" and "weaving" going on here. Lots of politics coming into play. Not your typical everyday, run of the mill investigation or prosecution of a "crime"
So when all is said and done, when all the above is taken into consideration, it is no wonder Corey "side stepped" the Grand Jury and pulled the plug on her own. A Grand Jury, in all likelhood, would not have come back with an indictment.
Chris-749391
It will still be be possible for the Martin family to sue him for wrongful death in civil court. This is because the standards of evidence are different between criminal and civil cases. In a criminal case, guilt must be proved to a reasonable certainty. In a civil case, it must only be proved by a preponderance of the evidence. A good example of that was the OJ Simpson trial where he won the criminal trial but lost the civil trial. Different standards of evidence.
Generally agree with your comment until that last paragraph. And in bringing up the debate on that one there is another way besides a trial to attach jeopardy and prevent future prosecution.
If a Grand Jury had processed the case, like they did in Texas, and found the killing justified (self defense or defense of another) that would permanently resolve the legal issues. In FL another way to attach jeopardy is as you say go to court but before it ever even starts into the TRIAL there can be a HEARING where the judge would apply FL Statute 776, or Self Defense from common law, or Self Defense under Castle Doctrine (maybe on that one).
As to the civil suit. I'll stick to the black and white outcomes as a hung jury verdict leaves it all up in the air. If George is found guilty that removes 776 from the play book. Civil suit is LEGALLY possible against George and the lawyers make a bunch of money sorting out who can or cant be sued and since George will have NO assets at that point (this lawyer will suck that 300k dry before day one in court) the suit will be an empty one. If George is found NOT Guilty then 776 applies. 776.022 says that if the force was justified (not guilty) then the person using the force is immune from civil action and the state MUST reimburse all reasonable costs, including lost wages, and fees to the defendant.
The only entity with potential assets is the HOA and they will argue that George was not acting in an official capacity (not scheduled to be on duty) the night of the shooting. Again the lawyers win.
He has been tryed and found guilty before the trial has even begun... there is no justice here for anyone.. this is just BS
"there is no justice here for anyone"...
certainly wasn't for Trayvon!
Zimmerman at least gets his day in court!
What if trayvon really is guilty of beating him up are you all going to say sorry to zimmerman??
There was a fight.
Trayvon was defending himself.
So was Zimmerman.
"What if trayvon really is guilty of beating him up are you all going to say sorry to zimmerman??"
What if zimmer really shot trayvon for no reason what can you say to trayvon? Nothing not even sorry.
Glock
"what if....."...interesting terminology... so I'll throw it back to you..
"what if Zimmerman is found guilty".......will there be anyway to apologize to Martin?
If Trayvon was defending himself from an attack, Trayvon would have had injuries on his body (other than the gunshot that obviously ended the fight) but he didn't. The only one with injuries consistent with being attacked is Zimmerman.
I didnt do anything wrong no need to apologize
if trayvon thought geoz was reaching into his jacket to pull a weapon trayvon it would make sense that he would have tried to defend himself.
irene46
so let's go with that thought. George presumed incorrectly that Trayvon was a member of the "Goons" (read the info release about known gangs in that part of town) and Trayvon incorrectly presumed George was reaching for a weapon. Both AssUMed things. The fight was on. Now what? Only ONE of them was entitled to defend themselves? More than one person has been shot by police due to those very type of mistakes.
Zim has established firmly that deception is a tool to him. We're done.
Agreed, Killbuckets!!!
Dear People,
Put away your hatred, bigotry and preconceived notions and look at just the facts. Witnesses must be backed up. Peoples memories of events can be inacurate. The court case will sift through all of this.
Many people base their opinions solely on their own experiences and this is very flawed. This was one specific incident, you can not use the whole of your life experience to judge what happened here, so please don't.
Only a fool would bring this case to trial. No chance at all the 12 juros will agree on guilt or innocence. If both were not idiots this would not be news now. Zimmer had no business carrying a gun and Tray had no business beating Zimmer. And no, justice will not be served.
"Justice will not be served".........and the riots will begin!!
"Zimmer had no business carrying a gun and Tray had no business beating Zimmer"
Not so, zimmer had the right to carry a gun, Tray had a right to defend himself. The question is who escalated the incident? When things like this happens, only one side is heard, that is why justice is hard to serve.
rusty-jarhead....(#7)..."Zimmer had no business carrying a gun"
He certainly did...He had a valid CCW Permit, his weapon was concealed, he was on his way to a Target store when he saw something suspicious as he was leaving his community....It's not like people don't get mugged and robbed in the parking lots of Shopping Centers on a dark rainy evening....or coming out of a restaurant..
___________________________________________________
Not exactly on topic, but may be of interest to some....
Many criminals are not stupid...they know certain laws....In Florida, before they changed the Statue to allow for Restaurant Carry ( Briefly, before the change, CCW permit holders were not allowed to carry in any restaurant that served alcohol) ...Some criminals knew that....people tend to be more attentive to their dinner partner than their surroundings walking back to the car...they were a favorite target of muggers.
The law was changed allowing Restaurant Carry with these stipulations....( for places like Applebees, TGI-Fridays, Ruby Tuesdays, etc)...You can't sit at the bar....and you still cannot drink alcohol while sitting at a table eating your meal.....After dark Parking Lot muggings went down considerably after the first few SYG defence incidents happened...The Criminals sat up and took notice...
Except for a few:
"Suspect in Okeechobee Steak House robbery arrested"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48153700/ns/local_news-west_palm_beach_fl/
Actually, GZ is within his rights to carry the gun...
"If both were not idiots this would not be news now. Zimmer had no business carrying a gun and Tray had no business beating Zimmer."
Who are you calling Trayvon an idiot? Trayvon had every reason for beating Zimmerman. Trayvon was simply standing his ground in the face of a bully. A fair fight. How could he know the bully was packing heat? Tell me, what would you have done if you were Trayvon? Be honest.....
sos
If I were Martin, I would have said " Hey bud, whats going on, Im staying right over there at my fathers girlfriends house, want some skittles?".
No, he didnt, and thats why he is dead.
sos - I would have kept walking, ran, or called the police myself. I certainly wouldn't have confronted Zimmerman. But then again I am not a 6'3" 180lb, muscular, weed smoking thug.
This shooting was what cops call a "ten percenter." In around 90% of shootings the victim knew the name of the shooter. It is much more likely to be a "friend" or a relative or a co-worker than a stranger by a huge amount. It makes 90% of shootings easy for cops to solve and prosecute. It's the other 10% that cause them heartburn, overtime, and sleepless nights.
It takes a true leap of logic for GZ to"stand his ground" from the short side of a self-provoked incident.
I'm a firm believer in stand your ground. But in this case zimmer was not standing his ground. Standing your ground would be if he got attacked near his truck.
They were much closer to his truck than to where Trayvon was staying.....In the last 1 minute on the phonecall when Zimmerman says he lost sight of him and the 2 minutes from the end of Zimmerman's call to police, to a single shot fired, a high school football player had plenty of time to get indoors...200 ft.away
40 seconds before the Phonecall to police ends, the dispatcher asks Zimmerman for his address...Zimmerman starts to give it, then hesitates , says he doesn't want to say it out loud because he has no idea where this guy is.
thepunisher-2054749 ..."I'm a firm believer in stand your ground. But in this case zimmer was not standing his ground. Standing your ground would be if he got attacked near his truck.
You obviously don't know how "Stand his or her ground " is defined.....Here is what the Florida Law defines it as , ( It is an extension of Castle Doctrine where one is in their home, to now include "any other place ):
A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity, and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
The common sidewalk between buildings on common property in Zimmerman's community was certainly a place he had a right to be standing.
Mike, yes I have read the law too. The key wording is " who is attacked". At this point I don't think anyone of us knows who initiated the attack first. Attacking someone is also subjective at best in this incident as we only have one side to the story. So by definition, tray also had the right to stand his ground.
thepunisher
Martin certainly had a right to stand his ground, but his rights dont trump Zimmermans, healso had a right to stand his ground, and the only person who had injuries consistent with being attacked is Zimmerman, what conclusion do you think a jury is going to come to? Does Zimmerman not have a right to defend himself from an attacker?
"but his rights dont trump Zimmermans"
That is opinion. zimmer has every right to defend himself from any attacker, the question is that is he the cause or did he provoke the incident. If so he loses that right. You don't get to go out and provoke a person, who still has a mental make up of a child into a physical altercation and shoot them. That is not the intent and spirit of the stand your ground law.
and before you come back with zimmer had the right as he was the neighborhood watch. Yes, he had the right to watch and report, but he did not have the right to be judge and executioner.
thephnisher
Thats an opinion? No, thats the law, Martins right do NOT trump Zimmermans. Now you get to try to prove who provoked whom, the evidence says Martin attacked Zimmerman and you cant prove otherwise. Zimmerman is innocent until proven guilty, he's not guilty until he proves himself innocent. Do you have any evidence that Zimmerman was the attacker, do you think a jury is going to look at the evidence and come to a conclusion other than Martin attacked Zimmerman?
Surely you jest. Near his truck, away from his truck, standing in the police parking lot with a hundred cameras on him, if he's attacked he has a right to stand his ground and defend himself.
thepunisher-2054749..(# 8.4)....I've asked this question before, but don't get an answer....I'll ask you:
If Zimmerman was the only one between the 2 of them that knew the Police were on their way to meet him there and were only moments away....And if Zimmerman was the only one that knew he had a gun...
Why would Zimmerman who was waiting for Police, not knowing where Trayvon was, all of a sudden attack him and shoot him real quick before the cops got there ???....Just so he could shoot someone and claim self-defence ???
.....or maybe the head pounding convinced him he couldn't wait for the cops to get there and save him ??
I know when I went for my CCW Permit....my instructor repeated over and over it's the last thing you ever want to do, draw and fire your weapon....your life will never be the same, even though it was justified.
thepunisher - it makes no logical sense that Zimmerman initiated an attack for three reasons - 1) he indicated that he had no idea where TM was to the dispatcher - it's pretty difficult to initiate an attack against someone when you don't know where they are, 2) if Zimmerman's intent was to attack TM he had plenty of opportunity to do it before he lost sight of TM, and 3) If Zimmerman was intent on attacking TM he certainly would not have called the police to report him first.
You're making a bold assumption that Zimmerman was Logical and Sensible.
We know there was AN attack.
We know Zimmerman has wounds indicating he was struck in that attack.
We know Trayvon has NO marks indicating he was struck WHATSOEVER, however has marks on his hands that could indicate he DID strike.
thepunisher-2054749- where's your information to show (or back up an assumption) that Zimmerman may have struck first?
I don't think a word of truth has left Zimmerman's mouth since he was on the phone telling the cops he was following someone...
Many normal guys, myself included, would have confronted GZ (and possibly kicked his ass) if they thought he was following them. The entire incident was of his manufacture.
wryobsever
Great for you.. the more I hear that if people think they are being followed the first reaction is to kick azz the more comfortable I am in using the defense that they turned around and it is reasonable belief they intend to harm me. Had you or anyone else kicked ass you would be just as likely to be on the medical examiners table as Trayvon.
Turn and bitch all you want.. even verbally challenge but the INSTANT you wind up that punch falls under reasonable belief of imminent serious bodily injury ... That opens the door to self defense. Please remember this .. outside the boxing ring or a refereed Olympic style wrestling match there is no such thing as a "fair fight". LIFE isn't fair. It is SAD and TRAGIC that Trayvon is dead. Stating that he did the right thing by hitting George is just plain dumb. Granted George did a LOT of stupid things that night but had Trayvon not taken a swing, first or last doesn't matter, he would not be dead or at the very least there would be no debate about who was at fault.
Day in Public Opinion Court,
Tray , expelled from School and was suspeneded before that for Drug Use & Fighting
Tray, Autopsy showed evidence of Drugs in system even trace shows he is still using and a habitual law breaker.
Tray, Was found in the vicinity of the vehicle as stated in reports doesnt seem like he was 'Running or walking Fast ' away from anyone
Tray's Parents, already capitalizing on trayvons death. Book deals, patents , copyrights on names/slogans etc
Eye Witness who saw struggle first hand says GZ was on bottom getting hit by Tray
911 Tape with yelling is inconclusive as too who is yelling.
Yes I think a non-lethal means should have been the first defense, but I live in a pretty secure area. I am sure a mayberry PD officer wont draw down on suspect as fast as a Detroit PD officer will. You have to consider the environmnet, the precursors, and the eye witness accounts. What is the Murder rate for that area? what demographics commit the most violent crimes in that area? what time of day or night are these crimes commited? A person who lives there would have an idea of what he or she is facing while an armchair juror would only see a dead teen.
Martin was suspended from school for having an empty baggie in his backpack that might have contained marijuana. It as never proven and the chool did not expel him.
The coroners report found trace amounts of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, in Martin's system below the level of impairment. While it is most likely that Martin did indeed smoke marijuana, one must also remember that THC is the ingredient in an FDA-approved pharmaceutical called Marinol, legal in all 50 states and many overseas countries, used to treat nausea and appetite loss, so while illegal usage is most likely, it also does not mean that is the ONLY way it could have gotten into his system. And as for 'habitual'--we do not know that he did not try it once and said never again--my husband when he was younger tried it when a friend gave it to him, hated it so much he never touched it again. That was 23 years ago.
Zimmerman was under psych treatment by a mental health professional and taking benzodiazepines and amphetamines--Adderall and Temazepam. Amphetamine-based medications are legal ONLY in the US and illegal everywhere else because of their side effects, which resemble those of meth users (they are the same base drug just different chemical composition) but in order for them to be effective there has to be more than a trace of them in Zimmerman's system.
There has been no mention of Zimmerman's vehicle that I have heard--the police report states that Martin was found lying facedown in a grassy area between two buildings with his hands under his body.
Martin's parents copyrighted Martins name because vendors and dealers were profiting off their sons death by creating t-shirts and other items that say 'I am Trayvon Martin' with his photo on it and making profits off the sale of those items. By copyrighting Martin's name the family has ensured those vendors cannot create and sell these things, and profit from selling those items--there is a flea market in my municipality which was recently raided by Homeland Security and those 'Trayvon Martin' t-shirts were among the copyright-infringement articles seized from vendors--along with the fake Gucci handbags and fake Nikes, fake designer perfumes and bootleg CDs and DVD's.
And said eyewitness has changed their story and now says they cannot be sure who as on top and who was on the bottom. Do a google search.
Yes, it is inconclusive.
JT, what's your point, both zimmer and tray had shady pasts. Yes the police may draw faster in areas where there are more crimes, but zimmer is not a police officer. There has yet to be a witness to come forward as to witness who started what, the only thing we have is zimmer's own account, which is flawed do to him wanting to save his own skin. But by your logic it is ok to shoot any minority who looks suspicious base in the area you live in, that is just ludicrous.
The Witness has retracted his statement and has stated he doesnt know who was on top. He Assumed it was Trayvon on top.
And you say he was near the vehicle yet all evidence I keep seeing he was in a back yard of a house so which was it?
John #10
talk about an "arm chair juror".....good grief - and you are so bad at it!
Michael,
That's not what the witness changed his statement to. The witness said he couldn't be sure who was yelling, but he had assumed it was Zimmerman because Zimmerman was on the bottom. He never changed his mind about who was on top.
Yes please stop with the misinformation. "Jonh" has ALWAYS stated it was GZ on the bottom. Please don't believe something without researching it yourself. (Not to mention the kid said it was GZ on the bottom as well).
Agreed that there's no witness yet to confirm who started the fight, but GZ account being "flawed" is your opinion. Regarding the fight, what we do have is physical evidence to help determine whether GZ's story is accurate.
Martin and GZ confronted each other less than a minute from where GZ had parked his car, and roughly twice that far from Martin's house. GZ had a bloody/broken nose and lacerations to the back of his head (which aligns with his story of being punched and having his head beaten into the ground). Martin had a cut near one of his knuckles (which aligns with having punched GZ's nose). Witnesses confirmed Martin was on top of GZ. The only injury Martin had was the GSW, and according to the evidence, the weapon was shot at close range (which aligns with GZ's story).
Unless more evidence is released, the physical evidence we have thus far seems to align with GZ's story. It will be hard to find him guilty of M2 without at least a reasonable doubt that he may have been defending himself given all the physical evidence.
Yes, it is hard to find him guilty of M2. I don't think zimmer is guilty of M2, but of involuntary manslaughter, because of his own stupidity. The evidence only show there was a fight that occur. It doesn't paint who is right and who is wrong. The incident could have escalated if zimmer grabed tray from behind, there are no physical evidence of that. At which point tray would have just like anyone else fought back. Just one of the many scenario that could have occured. It's hard to believe zimmer's account as he himself couldn't recall some of the things that happened, as well as making sure his story aligns with the stand your ground law.
thepunisher
These words dont exist in a court of law. If you cant prove it, you dont even get to bring the subject up.
Where did he mention anything about race in his post? That's the main problem with many of Martin's defenders here, assuming and then taking it as fact that race had anything to do with this, then trying to use it as proof of malicious intent on the part of Zimmerman. Anyone using race in their argument is telling the rest of us that you have no argument.
People are acting like this is the first time someone looks guilty of something before he is convicted. He is being tried in the public eye. Do you expect for people not to have an opinion? Or just hold off because G man is so special. #ThrowHimUnderTheBusAlready
WHO CARES!!Put up or shut up.........It's going to go on for another year.b dune...were you there???So shut the @!$%# up and wait.
I am curious about the prosecution's motive for releasing all this information to the public before a trial. There seems to be a lot of official effort to spin something here.
The judge order it to be released.. No conspiracy.
®¿®
Odd law. Seems like a great way to taint jury pools.
Unless you are a super hero, I'm not convinced that many of us could remember a lot of the specifics of the moment. There are a zillion scenarios of what could have happened, while it was happening and I am sure that I myself, could have been confused about many aspects of those events. Too me its like blanking out before, during or after a car accident. There are bits an pieces we lose and slowly they come back. The point is regardless of all the comments, a life was taken, regardless of good or bad, a life was taken. Personally, if I had been in that same position as GZ and, if the facts are correct that he was being beaten by TM, and, if I had a gun in my hand, I could only assume that my actions would have been the same. But in the end of the day, a life was exhausted. I'm scared that we as 'a people' and maybe for many reasons, have lost in our hearts what humanity is all about. There is so very little regard for human life now and it is 'scary'! We are the only ones that can make a difference and yes, I am a multiple gun owner and believe in my rights to carry, conceal and use if necessary but there is the problem................why should be taking a life ever be necessary?
Bill, here is when taking a life is necessary. I'm walking through the park. Two young guys jump out of the bushes with knives. They come toward me and I'm way too old to out run them. I pull out my gun and tell them to halt. They continue in my direction with their knives. I shoot in self defense. This kind of situation happens a lot (as opposed to the Zimmerman case). If I didn't have my gun I would likely be killed. This is why it is important to take another life when the circumstances dictate it. Thing about what I have said.
This is also a good example of Stand Your Ground.
Bill-2032535 there are several Eye Witnesses on here that have already convicted Zimmerman just on what if's, speculation & because I say so. Thank God these Nit Wits are not sitting on the Jury. All they see is what they want to see & nothing else. They would argue with a fence post. They have no wish for Justice & the truth. All they want is for it to turn out the way that they are guessing about it. Myself, By what I have heard & read, because I wasn't there like they were. I think he acted in self defense but I could be wrong. But it isn't up to me or the self appointed experts.
Hey mark, as I do agree with you in certain situation it is better to take someone else's life if it were between them or you, but where do you live that punks pull knifes on people a lot. Also you'll need to define "a lot" that is subjective at best.
Ponder...if Zimmerman shot Trayvon while being beaten while Trayvon was on TOP of him, why wouldn't their be blood stains from Trayvon on Zimmerman's clothing? Wouldn't there HAVE to be at least a few drops (if not a bunch)? I've felt all along that Zimmerman is a wannabe with a gun and a prejudice...and look where we are today. Even if Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked, since he initiated the conflict, does he have the right to kill the other person just because he couldn't finish what he started? He's an a$$-clown! P.S. I can't wait to see the emails between the chief and Zimmerman. He's another a$$-clown!
exLAer - Again another expert in blood splatter. Argg for the 10,000 time.
1. No the wound would bleed little and through a shirt and a sweatshirt little to no blood is going to get on GZ when the heart is pretty much done. Plus it was RAINING. Wow blood washes off...
2. Read up on it. Even if GZ was the aggressor (Which I don't see how given the location for events) you do not lose your right to self-defense. This is a huge misconception. You just have more "rules" to follow the biggest being trying to get away. Since Trayvon was on top of George and even if all he did was "push him down" and not bash his head in that's still enough to shoot to defend. That's just the law folks (AFAIK but its pretty black and white and the florida statues support this).
Depends entirely on the wound. Some gunshots bleed very slowly, and some bleed a lot.
Unfortunately, real life isn't like the movies. Every gunshot wound is not exactly the same. Sometimes a gunshot is insta dead... some times you can live for days with a gunshot wound without dying.
Well ex, I guess you are just going to have to live with it.
Sorry.
The only reason this might make sense is that Zimmerman is now claiming that Trayvon was still alive for a few moments so his heart was still beating pumping blood which would have caused the wound to keep bleeding more as if it was a midsection wound a lot of blood is held there.
So its a fair question but yeah some wounds dont bleed nearly as much. But if he was on top of Zimmerman I would have expected to find some blood on his shirt. Even if rain washed it off the stain to the fabric would have been there. Anyone who has ever had a bloody nose would know that blood does not come off very easy just from water.
And I am not sure if they explained this or not. Was the wound a thru and thru?
exLAerPonder
Have you read the autopsy report.. it was released some time ago and can be found online. The report basically reads that Trayvon was shot through the heart and bled out 2.5 liters (5 pints) into his chest, where there is plenty of room to contain ALL the blood. Fluids tend to move away from applied force, like a bullet. For bleeding to occur it is necessary to have a blood pressure, otherwise it just oozes and leaks. George didn't stay underneath long enough for that to happen. Even the police didn't see any blood on Trayvon once they rolled him over to perform rescue breathing. Even the medical examiner only noted stippling and tattooing but no blood externally on the body.
Trust
Gunshot wounds, especially with a 9mm are very tricky, Ive seen a person shot with a 9mm who didnt even know he was shot, the cops had to rip his shirt off and look for a hole. I got hit in the leg with an AK round in Viet Nam, I didnt know I was shot, I thought somebody just grabbed my leg, the strange thing is that the effects of getting shot are more mental than they are physical, realizing that youve been shot has more of an effect on you mentally than the physical effect. Its kind of hard to put into words. Does that make sense?
Steve-2081387
Does that make sense?
Makes sense... My point is with that much fluid (blood) in the chest cavity it just becomes physically impossible to take a breath and without air one cannot speak. I agree that the mental "switch/light" may take a short time but some physical things are just immediately in place. 5/8 of the total blood volume was in his chest. He also had a hole that would allow air inside his pulmonary cavity. Basically he had a better chance of breathing if a SUV was parked on his chest.
He may have been aware of all that was going on around him mentally and perhaps even been able to move.. but speaking and breathing not so much. Going back to your shot in the leg... had your leg been blown completely off your brain may not have registered it until you went to take a step fell flat on your face/ass and looked down to see if you stepped in a hole or something.
From the autopsy report, and unspent rounds, we know that Trayvon was shot with a FMJ round so there was minimal expansion/mushrooming. Even though the (bullet)jacket appears to have separated from the rest of the round most of the energy appears to have been expended to the heart and entry/pathway I'm not even sure we can say Trayvon bled out so much as immediate lack/loss of blood and shock.
General observation now that I've read part of the newly released information. There are no holes in Trayvons clothing per the FBI. That means either George lifted the clothing with the barrel as he brought the gun to bear... supporting the near point blank firing idea, or Trayvon had to have been holding his shirt up basically daring George to shoot him. show of hands... near point blank or trayvon was daring him to shoot him in the chest? BTW the firing system in the Keltec is internal rather than a traditional external hammer. Designed that way so it is less likely to catch on clothing, holsters or belly fat.
LISTEN UP!!! TRAYVON NEVER, EVER LAID ONE HAND ON GZ! Stop believing GZ's lies...how is it that Trayvon managed to punch GZ in the nose, bloody it, repeatedly bash GZ's head on the sidewalk causing it to bleed, smoother him by covering his bloodied nose, and mouth. Yet, not have any trace of GZ's DNA on his hands or under his fingernails?!?! GZ should have, at the very least, had fingernail scratches all around his head. His face shows ABSOLUTELY no signs of someone being punched multiple times.
Will he be found guilty in a court of law? Only God and a jury will decide that. One thing's for certain, two things for sure...he wrongly profiled Trayvon, then shot and killed him. It is time for him to take his punishment like a 'man' and not the scared, confused, 28 yr old kid, O'Mara is trying to portray!
ethnicbutee
Generally when someone opens with that remark, like say a politician, it's time to stop listening because the nest words out of their mouth are going to be "I'm right and you are wrong only because I say so and your opine is just opine and does not matter.
NEVER, EVER LAID ONE HAND ON GZ!
So you are stating that ALL the witnesses are wrong and George and Trayvon were NOT in some sort of physical contact?
Why? can't you hold a basketball, bowling ball, melon, coconut or football in your hands without using your fingernails? I'm not an athlete but can manage to do that quite well.
OK lets say we give you that one... Self defense does not require multiple hits only reasonable belief that serious bodily injury or death is imminent.
We will give you the shot/killed.. he admitted as much and there is no debate there. As to profile or wrongful? Trayvonn fit the description of those committing crimes in the area. As far as we know it wasn't trayvon committing those crimes. Doesn't make it "wrong" to suspect someone though only incorrect.
If it was a justified (self defense) killing then why should he be punished more than he already has been. He has to live with what happened. As to trying to portray George for what he is.. nothing wrong with that... Even the Martin camp has been calling him a scared confused coward. That is a no win for George.. He denies it you get upset. He agrees you get upset... make a choice.
trust - ok, you "got me", "you got it"...or whatever that crap GZ claims Trayvon said. Listen here (lol)...
We definitely know for a fact that W6 John got it wrong, as for ALL the witnesses...I don't recall any others beside John that saw any physical contact. You know full well that I meant he didn't lay hands on GZ causing any of those supposed 'life threatening' injuries.
Certainly I could, when going about holding them in an everyday manner. However, if you were using the melon, or coconut in the violent manner that Trayvon was supposedly doing to GZ's head. I can assure you they'll sustain a lot more damage than two minute scratches in a centralized location!
You see, there in lies the problem with GZ and his 'self-defense' claim. What 'reasonable' person do you know or believe, would allow themselves to be pummeled, have their head repeatedly bashed against a sidewalk, and not have any type of defensive wounds to himself or his attacker, well, except the fatal bullet wound to the chest! He even expects us to believe that, after the initial punch and he stumbles some 30-40 ft, and only 'sissy swatted' him away. LOL! C'mon, even two year old toddlers will instinctively strike back, it's in our nature.
Ok, you get 10 demerits for that statement...can't believe you even went there! But since you did...you mean he fit the description, 'blacks'??? Since that's the only description of the other 'suspects' that GZ was calling in. Actually, has any neighbors other than GZ, SheLie, or Laaffe Taaffe, called and reported on these crimes? No, nothing wrong if you 'suspect' someone of 'wrong' doing when that's what they're actually up to. That wasn't the case here. GZ didn't even have the wherewithal to 'correctly' identify someone wearing criminal attire, as pointed out in his interview with Inv. Serino (e.g. wearing ALL black, not khaki colored slacks, and white sneakers).
Yea, well that's a big IF...I think I'm justified in calling him a 'cowardly liar'...but does it make it ok? GZ is doing a fine job at portraying himself as just that!
When it's all said and done, there are no winners! GZ had a choice that night, he chose death! So now it's HIS LIFE, the Martin/Fulton's, THAT'S FOREVER CHANGED!
Peace and Good Night to you friend!
unlike a melon or coconut it's hard to image that geoz would not be putting up resistance to trayvon banging his head on the walkway which would prevent trayvon from striking geoz's head to the concrete with much force.
ethnicbutee
I'll give you some flex in that you hadn't had a chance to read the information release prior to making that statement. I suggest you do ... it takes a couple hours if you read rather than skim. SEVERAL NEIGHBORS had called in about mainly Blacks and a few whites. Same with George. One neighbor who lives near the ungated pedestrian access even states that on a regular basis Blacks smoking BLUNTS enter the community through that area. Also interestingly the local gangs call themselves "GOONS" and are mostly Black with only a token White person as members.. per pollice GANG enforcement. So George was not the ONLY person reporting issues or that Blacks were the suspects. Enjoy the reading... it put me to sleep.
I never said what size of IF.. only that was the question before the courts... and if once you read the information release you will see the prosecution has a REAL BURDEN in court. As to GZ portraying himself, maybe in the eventual movie, some say he is a great actor (/sarcasm). The only one speaking for George seems to be O'Mara... and be real that is his JOB. Someone has to speak for him and I think we all agree that George is his own worst enemy when it comes to speaking in any manner in this matter.
Other than the lawyers and Media I agree.
well if we're to believe GZs version, only resistance he put up during the whole life and death assault was to 'scoot' his head from the sidewalk to the grass... one would think if he could make the effort to do that, surely he could've attempted to get an advantage over Trayvon. Considering the distance from edge of sidewalk and location of body, that's a lot of 'scooting', imo.
I look at it this way. (and im not being racist). how many 17yo black guys dont have an issue with authority never mind a so called white man.i figure maybe 1 out 0f 10. if the media would stop showing pics of him when he was 14 and holding cute little babies, and show the real trayvon with gold teeth and tattoos,(which i also have tattoos and they dont make me bad) but his look a little gangbangerish. and what about his twitter comment that the parents tried ot did delete. about talkin to his buddies about killing people for disrespecting them??? lets call an apple an apple.
It takes one to know one
If how you dress is a crime, or even cause for suspicion, I'm the walking dead.
Please post us a link of the "so-called" photos of Tattoos and gold teeth. Unless you know something we dont, the Coroner stated he only had one Tattoo....you people should really cut the sh!t!! Its old now! And if Gold Teeth and Tattoos make you look, as YOU stated "GANGBANGERISH" then half of the South (black & white) should he considered Gang Bangers.....YOU watch too much TV dude!
open wide what is that supposed to mean. i will try to find it but stuff like that is getting burried
Sometimes how you dress is a crime. I would be expected to be detained and charged if I dressed like a police officer or any other thing that I wanted false respect or personal gain from. That would be like fraudulant and misreprsentation. I dress how I want people to preceive me and not get the wrong conclusion and besides, it's just my taste the way I dress. It's not a crime but you usually want to get respect from the way you dress.
There are several legit phots of him with his gold teeth in. I can't post the link but its not hard to find. Its not the kid dual flipping the camera off (although several Trayvon photos show this as wll). Did he have them in then I don't think so. He does have a tattoo, has a deep voice and is 6'3" according to his mother so would you consider this a "child" if you didnt know him. NO way...
I cant seem to post link here but if you do a simple search. trayvon martins twitter posts they come up on website called the daily caller. his username is (i love this one) no limit nigga. quite interesting to see how he talks to people. please check it out then get back to me
What is so called white man suppose to mean? If you and him put out your arms next to each other will there be a difference? Probably not.
I meant that in a police officer mentality..."It takes one to catch one." You need to be willing and able to go to the same extreme someone you are trying to catch will go to. Hence, G man.
i never said anything about the way he is dressed i dont give a crap about how he is dressed its about how you present yourself. its about attitude and being standoffish when questioned.
..high school kids have their own ways of communication. who gives a shyt
He wasn't being questioned, he was being bullied
open wide YOU DONT KNOW THAT!!!!! YOU WERENT THERE!!!!
I do recall there being a problem with Facebook. Someone with the name Trayvon Martin was thought to be this Trayvon Martin. He was older and had tatts and gold teeth. So maybe this is what he was talking about. Of course this is all from months ago and I have seen many posters use this Facebook Picture as their defense of Zimmerman.
But I must ask this.. Who cares how he talks to people or how he talks with his friends. So if I don't like how you talk to your friends I should be allowed to shoot you?
if he talked to a cop that way he would get loceked up. its called having respect and more people need to get some. no i dont think anyone should get shot for how they talk but if my head was gatiing smashed into the ground (if thats how it went down) i would have done the same. but you would lay there and take it right. 1 less dumb liberal in the countery to ruin it
Michael,
If Trayvon was still that little kid in the football outfit, there would be no one believing anything Zimmerman had to say. And I believe that is why that photo was used in first place to make the story (hooray for the media).
I certainly was upset and outraged when I first saw this story. I still am, but now I am upset and outraged at being manipulated by the way the story was originally presented.
"I look at it this way. (and im not being racist)."
If you are not racist, you don't need to open up defending your opinion. However, you are racist due to your own admittance of ignorance in your post about things that are different than your own perception of how people should be like you.
daryl:
Any proof as to who started the fight? Well, other than the broken/bloody nose that GZ sustained and the lacerations to the head that GZ sustained, and the cut near the knuckle that Martin sustained? Either Martin punched then jumped on top of GZ (as GZ explained), or GZ attacked Martin by using his nose and the back of his head on Martin's knuckle...Which sounds more likely to you? Please pass on any evidence that exists to support that GZ started the fight (or even took part in the fight), other than the GSW. However, since none seems to exist, we're left to rely on the physical evidence and GZ's story to determine what actually happened...
Also, are you insinuating that carrying a gun is a step in being a coward? I generally don't consider police officers to be cowards, but just wanted to clarify that you feel it's cowardly to carry a gun...?
daryl:
Smyth to daryl:
"..., are you insinuating that carrying a gun is a step in being a coward? I generally don't consider police officers to be cowards, but just wanted to clarify that you feel it's cowardly to carry a gun...?
Smyth, stop posting stupid comments. You know that is not what daryl is saying at all. The point is....only a coward would bring a gun to a fist fight. A coward would never say "uncle" .... or "you got me, I give up"
sos-1948083
That is exactly what daryl and others ARE stating.. Carrying a gun is cowardly and "unfair" in a street fight. If you aren't strong enough to beat the criminal or bully or just the next guy then you should take your lumps and call the police.. even if it means you will be a dead body and they are just there to file paperwork and notify next of kin.
Only an IDIOT would carry a gun and allow someone to continue beating on them. "God created man... Colt made them equal" "When seconds count, police are only moments away" That second one really works in this case.. police arrived about 2-4 minutes too late. "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6." That one seems to apply here as well.
sos:
Didn't realize the fight had been scheduled as a "fist fight"....Not sure if that had actually been established...
GZ carrying a weapon in this instance is a perfect example of why people choose to do so. He had no idea he'd be attacked by this kid when he left his house, but as it turned out, he was attacked, and could have been seriously injured had he not had the firearm. You generally don't carry a firearm for the things you KNOW are going to happen, you carry one for the things you don't know are going to happen...
Your statement is incorrect. There is no evidence that Zimmerman was attacked,that is your opinion but not fact. There was an altercation but there has been no concrete evidence as to who started it. Zimmerman's injuries prove nothing other than he was in a fight and that is all. You are projecting when you say he was attacked.
Please prove it is incorrect with facts/evidence.
There are two forms of evidence that suggest GZ was attacked. GZ and other witnesses provided their versions of what happened, and the physical evidence (GZ having broken nose, bloody face, cuts to face and back of head, while Martin had no injuries other than a cut near his knuckle and the GSW). You can choose to ignore these realities, but you cannot deny that the evidence exists.
Thoughtful posting, Bill!
I am sorry that any one loses a child in this way....TM was a Thug in training looking to make his bones . The media is out to crucify GZ as is the prosecutor .She is out to make her bones as well. Bad deal all around . The Martins suffer ,The Zimmerman's Suffer (and will never recover financialy) The public suffer from the cost of the trial and the animosity put between the races.
Here is a picture taken 9 days before Trayvon was shot
http://globalgrind.com/news/Trayvon-Martin-9-Days-Before-Death-Photo?gpage=1#gtop
In this picture, all of you can see that Trayvon had no tattoos on his face. You can see he is VERY tall and VERY thin. He looks like a very responsible kid who has a bright future.
Thug in training? Really? HOW WOULD YOU POSSIBLY KNOW??????????? And even if he was, what does that have to do with Zimmerman. He was a neighborhood WATCH volunteer. His "job", which comes with no authority whatever, was to WATCH and CALL the real authorities. Not to precipitate this kind of incident. I have to wonder if you haven't attached the wrong name to "thug in training."
And its a well known fact that all thugs in training will be in possession of Skittles!
That's not Trayvon in the picture.
No sweat. The coroner will have pictures of the real Trayvon.
Know what I'm sayin'?
"know what I am saying"....sure do and you will be looking pretty foolish!
but I'm sure this will be nothing new for you!
Yeah...and all young adults dress and act the same on family outings as they do when they're with friends or on their own.
Hand selected photos by the family (notice how Trayvon has his teeth hidden in every shot, even though everyone else is all smiles) will not show the true picture.
YAHTC, those pictures made my heart hurt for the Martins.
Treyvon really looks like a thug in the Reese's T-shirt too. /s
Argues: Seriously? There is even a picture of him wearing a hoodie. He's no more imposing than any 17 year old.
So if someone has gold teeth we should shoot them as Thugs and Thieves?
Your a moron, please dont have children.
No, but if someone aspires to look like a thug, act like a thug, and talk like a thug, they should not be surprised when they are viewed as a thug.
BTW: It's "you're", not "your". Thanks for showing your level of intelligence.
you all have thoughtful comments
Here is a picture taken 9 days before Trayvon was shot
#gtop
In this picture, all of you can see that Trayvon had no tattoos on his face. You can see he is VERY tall and VERY thin. He looks like a very responsible kid who has a bright future.
Yes you're right...He is very tall(over 6 ft.)...I would recognize him as a threat if he were to back track to follow me after I turned my back on him, and started asking me if I had a problem.Even those so called "look at me i'm innocent" photos that the family is posting cant hide that.
Anyone would have thought Trayvon suspicious if he came in our neighborhood just by virtue of the fact we had never seen him there before and he is of an age of many criminals. If he had been 65 he probably would not be all that suspicious. Watching our own neighborhoods is one of the best deterrents of crime.
The misleading pics the Martin family posted of the 12 year old fooled no one except the media. It will back fire on them.
"TM was a Thug in training looking to make his bones"
Since you have this information, were you the one training him?
People seriously are a joke. You know nothing about Trayvon Martin and you'd come here posting that he's a thug. You wouldn't know a thug from whatever corner of suburbia you are posting your nonsense. What a bunch of clowns. You people are so wrapped up in what this kid was wearing and if he had gold teeth but none of that tells you who a person is because a lot of your kids are running around looking like that today,hypocrites. I wonder if Bernie Madoff was wearing a hoodie when he committed his crimes...jerks
we do know that he had drugs in his system. we do know that he was suspended from schools for something related to drugs. he also did not have any problem attacking a stranger, all these things paint a picture of who Trayvon was. If it looks like a skunk, smells like a skunk the odds are good that what you see is a skunk.
LOL
guess the s stands for skunk as in skunkfox?
I think Zimmerman was hunting trayvon and trayvon tried to stand his ground from this maniac (zimmerman) but lost because the hunter was well armed.
We know he's ma scammer. (As is his wife.) We know he's a perjurer. (As is his wife.) And I strongly suspect he is totally guilty of this crime. The real problem for Georgie is simply this...In his heart he thinks he a pretty smart, tough guy. In reality, he ain't smarter than nobody. And he certainly wasn't man enough to handle a kid he out weighed by 25 pounds.
Trayvon was no kid. He was a black belt and could have killed Bruce Lee.
Give me a break...
Lmao
What a witch hunt.
This Florida Media Circus would never exist if the roles were reversed.
We would never have heard a 2nd peep out of the media if the criminal black dude shot the white'ish looking community watch guy.
Whiteish? That's a new one in the race handbook.
Give him a fair trial and then take him out and hang him
No. I think we should stab him, then we shoot him, THEN we hang him.
I just don't understand why Hispanics and Blacks hate each other.
Zimmerman was actually a vocal supporter of racial equality, and vocally denounced the mistreatment of blacks by local police departments.
I don't think he really profiled Martin for his race. He Profiled him for how he looked to him which is still Profiling. But I doubt race played a huge factor. He might even have used Slurs like Coon or whatever (That audio clip of the call really does kinda sound like Coon to me too) but that could be just anger and venting and people do that all the time.
Michael Wells-4828365
Sure lets stir that dead subject AGAIN. Goon, coon, punk were the picks of the litter.. The prosecution for the RECORD, base I believe on FBI analysis, said PUNK. BTW coon(ass) is a offhand generally non offensive reference to a hick/cajun in Louisiana.
I agree that it was frustration or anger that prompted the utterance. sunny beaches comes to mind in some parts.
Elwood,
The better question is, why does anyone hate black people?
Could it be they are fighting for the same small piece of pie?
Maybe it's because the black race has been vilified to ever other race.
Why is it OK for a white male to date who he choose and the world is OK with it it? But when you see any other race dating we question it.
My answer to your question is Ignorance.
Zimmerman has made his OWN bed and he will be made to lay in it! I continue to come to these boards and see IDIOTIC posts from people stating that Trayvon was a Thug. How the Fukk does anyone here know that? Is it because he was a Black Teen wearing a Hoodie? Please don't say its because he was Suspended from school. Many Teens are Suspended from School. Suspension and Hoodies don't make a Thug. Some dumb assess just don't actually know what a REAL THUG is!!! The only person in THUG MODE that night was Zimmerman, who should have kept his nosey ass in his car!
Zimmerman was OUT OF ORDER that fateful night and he will have to pay for it when Sentenced. He has killed an UNARMED Teenager that was minding his own business that night! END OF STORY!
Amen!
Maybe becasue he had stolen jewerly in his pocket along with a Screwdriver? Maybe because he was a drug dealer? Maybe because he was a "NOLIMIT@!$%#". maybe becasue he was susepended for punching a school bus driver. Oh and BTW your a troll.
I don't know where your getting your evidence from Robert... But it still doesn't make it a good reason for him to be killed... :/ just saying.
@Robert - First of all, I have been posting here for over 3 years and I am most definitely NOT a Troll! Secondly, just because I have pointed out that this Teenager should NOT be labeled as a THUG, does not make me a Troll. There was never proof that the jewelry was stolen, so you sir are a liar there. Where was it EVER stated/proven or even mentioned that this kid was a Drug Dealer?? And it has been posted NUMEROUS times that the No Limit Niqqa wasn't even Trayvon! You are actually the Troll and you are posting lies and BS!!
I get the mix up with Drug Dealer and Drug User but their no the same. A know a few people who do Pot. I personally don't Drink or do any form of drug higher then Asprin or what not but doing Pot does not make you a thug, gangbanger, killer, or anything else.
sho ur right!
Robert-1319721
you are starting to make George sound reasonable...
The jewerly/screwdriver was from a previous suspension that was over graffiti.
He had the twitter handle #NOLIMITNIGGA... at least get it fight... close doesn't count
He was NEVER EVER suspended for fighting or violence. Tardy/late the first time, graffiti the second time, and possession of drug paraphernalia the third time. Each time for 10 days... though per school policy the 2nd or at least the 3rd should have been expulsion or referral to alternative schooling.
You referred to a school bus driver ... and I have seen it before but not ONE of the posters can provide a link to the source... other than a vague reference to someones FB. That is about as valid/proof as the claim that George threw some woman across the room.
NOTE: I'm in Georges camp but wish some folks would quit with the false and half true statements.
The woman across the room stuff comes from here and the people talking to them. They show Zimmerman stuff in VA all the time sense this is where he comes from. They make him look really bad in this state from going to old places he worked and things like that.
The only reason I know about his stuff online is they talk about him almost everyday on the news here. Every little subject that comes up he's on the main news. They even had a thing on TV Zimmerman for president with Mitt Romney lol. News in VA are out for blood when it comes to Zimmerman.
This is the USA, we do have the right to carry a gun. If Zimmerman did not have a gun he would just be another victim of a blackman sucker punching and beating him into a comma.
I can see you've mastered the art of spin.
It will be interesting to see what the jury decides.
And rightfully so!
There isn't enough evidence for a guilty verdict. There isn't enough evidence to draw a conclusion from what happened either.
The only real evidence shows that Zimmerman had injuries consistent with someone who had been attacked, he had a right to defend himself, and he did. They will never convict him with this evidence.
How do you beat someone into a "comma"?!
You Punctuation them in the face! !!!!................................I'm Sorry
BigPoppa Lahmeek
Are you sure about that? Seems a LOT of stories lately have been about the first thing a young Black male does when he meets someone on the street is throw a punch. Lets hear how YOU would have responded to meeting George that night on the sidewalk in the rain.
All of you people are full of sh it. None of you were there, none of you knows what happened, and not one single one of you even knows one damn thing even about the evidence of this situation. But you damn sure make yourselves out to be experts on it alright !
Midnight
I think Brother Duane would agree with you.
God save us from Security Guards who are actually trying to do their jobs. All Martin had to do was stop, show the man where he was going and why and deal with the matter respectfully and politely. Instead he got confrontational made more trouble for himself than he could handle. Too bad, so sad.
George was NOT a guard. His "job" was to WATCH and CALL the real authorities. He had NO authority to do anything else. Why can't you people get that. He should NEVER have made contact with Martin in ANY manner. Get it? (Probably not.) Martin was NOT in the process of committing any crime. YOU and MARTIN and all of us have a right to be left alone!
he did not make contact with martin, Martin ran away and george headed back to his vehicle, wow Trayvon shows up back at the truck wanting to fight. george was watching! the short little fat guy is not running down Trayvon. Trayvon came back to the truck to beat up the short little fat guy. He was in a gated community. maybe you do not understand why people choose to live in a gated community. They don't want riff raft floating around.
Prove he did any more than that before the confrontation. "Watching" does not mean you cannot follow. What good is a community watch patrol if the patrol has to sit still and can't go look around that corner? Anyone can follow anyone anywhere it is legal for both of them to be, it's not even stalking unless it happens more than once. There was no contact until the altercation. In fact, going just on the given testimonies, not speculations, it was Trayvon that initiated contact.
Yankee Boy-957719
Who exactly grants a regular citizen authority to intervene when they believe a crime is being committed?
If you believe a crime is being committed, or possibly being committed, there is no one you need to ask before you look into it. He's not a cop. However, if someone is stealing your neighbors stuff, there is no legal requirement for you to lock your doors and wait for the cops. Period.
Cops want you to, but you don't have to.
Thanks Geo 446283, You nailed it. Trayvon also had a chance to cool the situation when he demanded that Geo tell him why he was following him, and George answered him by wanting to know what he was doing there, and all Trayvon had to say he was heading back to his Dads girlfriends condo where he was "visiting"....but we all know Trayvon wasn't in the answering mood...oopsie, and IMHO I think when Trayvon walked around Georges car up front and stared at George, he was checking George out to see if George was a cop. That was an aggressive move to intimidate George to stop him from following him.
So it makes one wonder if little Trayvon figured George wasn't a cop, and the opportunity presented itself by chance, little Trayvon wigged out and decided to open a can of whoopa$$ on George cuz with all the other stupid crap he'd been doin' in school,then getting sent up with Dad cuz maybe mom was trying to keep him from hanging with his drug buddies while serving out his suspension (#3) he just couldn't take the world picking on him anymore....and now some jerk was following him. Yet another poor decision...picked on a guy with a gun on his hip that I'm sure he wasn't aware of cuz Goerge didn't take it out till he'd had enough of this dumba$$ beating on him and no help in sight...oh well...Life has it's cruel twist and turns and if you ain't paying attention...it'll kick your rear.
once in for all will you zimmer-nuts stop repeating GZ story like it is fact. it is the story of the shooter (a story) the facts are GZ saw TM , GZ called Police about TM , GZ followed TM and GZ came face to face with TM.
returning to his truck is GZ story ( no proof) TM punched him 1st is GZ story ( no proof) TM said "you're going to die tonight" is GZ story ( no proof) TM pounded GZ head on the sidewalk is GZ story (medical evidence says not very likely) a high school teen beat 28 year old GZ like a rag doll and he had to shoot him , is GZ story ( and a very wimpy story at that) my guess is GZ bloody nose wasn't caused by TM it happen to be GZ time of the month . LOL ' help help a high school teen is beating me like a wife of a drunken hillbilly" what a weak excuse for a man.......
You people need to meet real thugs. Once you know the difference you will know not to mess with one. A real thug most likely never finished school. A real thug would not be on the internet because he has money to make selling drugs. A real thug has a gun on him all the time because of other thugs. If Zimmerman ran across a real thug he would not be alive today. Once he started following in the car and wasn't a cop a real thug would have put bullets in his head.
Thats the difference between whites and blacks. We know what real thugs are, we know not to mess with one unless we want to end up on the street dead. He knew the boy wasn't a thug, Zimmerman comes from VA so he knows what they look like. No adult with a brain would get out of their car to follow a real thug.