Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There has never been an iota of evidence produced that Martin assaulted Zimmerman.
His gun-slinging, RW supporters just want to believe what their Hero said. Here is the timeline of the incident, not that it will likely help Z's supporters to see the light:
6:54 – 7:12 — Martin has an 18-minute cell phone call with a girl reported to be his girlfriend. The call gets disconnected.
7:09:34 – 7:13:41 — George Zimmerman calls the Sanford Police Department (SPD) from his truck; total time of the call is 4 minutes 7 seconds.
7:11:33 — Zimmerman tells the police dispatcher that Trayvon Martin is running.
(*Note - it is during this time that Z has exited his truck, and can be heard walking).
7:11:59 — In reply to the dispatcher's question, "Are you following him?" Zimmerman responds with, "Yes." Dispatcher: "OK, we don't need you to do that." Zimmerman: "OK."
7:12:00 – 7:12:59 — The girl calls Martin again at some point during this minute.
7:13:10 — Zimmerman says he does not know Martin's location.
7:13:41 — The end of Zimmerman's call to Sanford police.
*Note - It was during this time that he can be heard exiting his truck and walking. It is also when he asks the dispatcher to "Just have them (Police) call me when they get here and I will tell them where I am". (Now, if he had been actually returning to his vehicle as expected, he would have gone there to wait). He was obviously not fearing a controntation, being armed and was getting prepared.
7:16:00 – 7:16:59 — Martin's call from the girl goes dead during this minute. [the precise time surfaced during the trial, the call ends at 7:15:43, 1 minute and 12 seconds before the shot.]
7:16:11 — First 911 call from witness about a fight, calls for help heard.
7:16:55 — Gunshot heard on 911 call.
7:17 — The first officer on the scene, Officer T. Smith arrives by squad car at Retreat View.
7:17:40+ — Officer Smith arrives at the crime scene.
7:19:07 — Photo taken of Zimmerman's head injuries by a civilian bystander.
There was not a lot of time for much to occur. I've always felt that Z didn't hold back, prepared to initiate the attack. (After T had asked him, "Why are you following me?), 1 min &12 sec later, being shot.
It was witnessed by a 13 year-old, seeing T on his back, moaning, crying.
G supporters don't get that if being attacked, one would be fighting back. They dwell on the one view of T having been on top at some point and believing a bloody-head being caused by another... (since who would be insane enough to damage themselves? One who does not want to return to prison!).
(I wonder how it would have turned out, if wimpy hadn't had a gun?). Oh, but wait.. he would not have confronted then.. and if the Police had approached T, they would have found no reason to arrest. T would have been alive and Z would still be following others, or possibly been caught doing the same.
Z's supporters do not want to believe he was / is emotionally disturbed, on medication for and has a history of violence. Why do they? I have no idea, but those who are rational, empathetic and thinking individuals, know the truth.
Last edited by In2itive_1; 03-03-2015 at 02:49 AM..
Z's supporters? Is this your euphemism for anyone who agrees with the jury's verdict, and the conclusions of the Obama Administration? Who are you to say what others believe or don't believe?
The point being, is that someone not blinded by race bias, looks at the evidence presented and concludes objectively the prosecution failed to prove their charge of murder or anything else done wrong. This doesn't mean they are a cheerleader for the Zimmerman. It only means they agree that proper due process was served.
I asked you a bunch of questions to try to get your explanations for why certain injuries weren't present on Zimmerman, and rather than trying to explain how they could be absent, you make a claim that asking you questions is a conspiracy theory and the lack of these key findings is irrelevant to George's credibility. That's quite amusing.
Please tell me where in the above you see a conspiracy? I personally only see a defendant who lied.
Still waiting for your explanation for how George's story could be true and all of the above expected physical evidence totally absent from his body.
Yeah, that one continually avoids answering good questions. He goes in circles, is guarded, and is being judgemental and condescending among other things.
Do you believe it would be irrational for a thief to case a house by walking around by it and then calling his buddies in a car down the street and telling them it's all good? Does that strike you as crazy?
If you were in your home at night, would you be more likely to notice the headlights of a car circling your building are a person in dark clothing?
Unless you have thermal vision, I'd guess you'd notice car lights.
All these assumptions, scenarios being projected due to this incident. Just to mention, I believe T was wearing light clothing - Gray, Khaki and white shoes. He was not "casing anything". This incident only developed due to one person's false perceptions - not different from what I see going on here.
The bottom line is.. ((sigh)) TM was NOT there for any other reason than trying to return to his Dad's girlfriend's home where he was staying.. they were going to watch a game on TV.
Zimmerman Tutored black children for FREE on weekends over the last several years.
...a Ms. Rachel Jeantel and her "creepy-ass-cracker" remark.
He is not part Jewish, the name is German. Even if he has some Hispanic ancestry, who the heck cares?
I would like to know how and what he was Tutoring children. Is this supposed to absolve him?
And what is it with discussing "Rachel's remark" more than once? What point are you trying to make? Does this suggest she and her friend were "against the white man"? GZ was clearly doing something odd, so they had a way of referring to him, due to that.
BBM. What forensics are you claiming supports the positions of Zimmerman and Martin when the shot was fired? Furthermore, what forensics would rule out any other possible position than Martin on top and Zimmerman on the bottom?
Your second claim has already been covered. There were no "offensive" wounds on Martin. In fact, there was only a scratch, and that scratch, if sustained in the fight at all, could have just as easily been from a defensive action, an action that was neither offense or defense, and/or movement of the body while undergoing terminal posturing or postmortem. Zimmerman's own wounds could have been while engaging in actions that were offensive or defensive. So, you seem to want to put your own narrative onto the medical evidence and claim the physical evidence proves your narrative is correct when it doesn't.
I agree with you that the evidence doesn't tell us conclusively what DID happen. It can, however, tell us quite a few things about what didn't happen. In fact, quite a bit of the physical evidence definitely ISN'T consistent with the story Zimmerman told the police.
No matter what the weights of these two combatants or your personal assessment of who could or should be able to handle whom, Zimmerman lied about what took place between them. One has to question why he did so. One possible reason is because he has an overactive threat perception and fear reaction, so he perceives things and dramatizes them out of proportion to reality. Another possible reason is that he deliberately exaggerated the conflict because he needed to justify his use of lethal force.
Pedro offered no evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman; you haven't either. My hypothetical "if Zimmerman attacked Martin..." was simply a transposition of the names in the hypothetical posed by Martinez to prove the point that no one knows who attacked whom. Except Zimmerman, and he's not talking.
If you have evidence that I am wrong, please put it forth here and now.
There is no evidence that TM attacked Z. Given no witnesses other than Z to what happened, there was never going to be evidence of who attacked who. Though I believe TM threw the 1st punch, for the most part it doesn't matter, legally.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
