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.
Let's put it this way....since YOU don't know whaqt happened, and I don't know what happened, let the COURTS decide what did happen.
What you don't seem to get is that because of the cursory and cavalier way the Sanford cops (protect and serve, remember????) treated the killing, the courts were never going to get this case in the first place.
Quote:
Did martin deserve to die? no...but that whole incident could have gone WAY different if it's true that martin attacked Zimmerman. If Zimmerman shot martin without provocation, then he deserves to be found GUILTY and sentenced accordingly.
There was provocation. The fact that the two even were close enough to have any type of confrontation speaks to Zimmerman's provocation of the encounter.
Quote:
This whole thing is TRAGIC....but people taking sides and assuming that they KNOW what happened is doing nothing more than fueling an already raging racial inferno. I would ask that common sense prevail and we let the courts and the evidence make the decision....otherwise there will be MORE senseless death.
What's tragic is that the cops took Zimmerman's word for it after the slaying AND that they did nothing to try to figure out who the dead kid was in the first place NOR try to inform his parents of what happened to him. But I'm supposed to trust the system? Yeah, right.
Well...we will never know...and I don't think that zimmerman could make that judgement either if what he says is true.
In the same situation, I wonder what any of these people clamoring for zimmermans incarceration would have done. It's easy to sit back and arm chair quarterback this whole thing and condemn a man when you can't possibly know what the situation was that he was facing.
"What's tragic is that the cops took Zimmerman's word for it after the slaying AND that they did nothing to try to figure out who the dead kid was in the first place NOR try to inform his parents of what happened to him. But I'm supposed to trust the system? Yeah, right."
The cops are not dummies and do not just take someone's word without some level of evidence.
They did nothing to figure out who the dead kid was????????
Everyone but you knows who he was.
What you don't seem to get is that because of the cursory and cavalier way the Sanford cops (protect and serve, remember????) treated the killing, the courts were never going to get this case in the first place.
There was provocation. The fact that the two even were close enough to have any type of confrontation speaks to Zimmerman's provocation of the encounter.
What's tragic is that the cops took Zimmerman's word for it after the slaying AND that they did nothing to try to figure out who the dead kid was in the first place NOR try to inform his parents of what happened to him. But I'm supposed to trust the system? Yeah, right.
Exactly!! Warning; giving so much logic and reason may cause someone to WAKE-UP to the truth.
"What's tragic is that the cops took Zimmerman's word for it after the slaying AND that they did nothing to try to figure out who the dead kid was in the first place NOR try to inform his parents of what happened to him. But I'm supposed to trust the system? Yeah, right."
The cops are not dummies and do not just take someone's word without some level of evidence.
Really? They didn't know about Zimmerman's prior arrests. Or maybe they didn't care.
Quote:
They did nothing to figure out who the dead kid was????????
Everyone but you knows who he was.
Then why did his parents not know what had happened until days later? Why didn't the police look at Trayvon's phone? His parents should have known what happened IMMEDIATELY. Cops are not dummies? Than what were they?
The inflamation of this case lies directly and completely with the news media's attempt to make a profit and further a political agenda by using racial overtones. The news media needs to be on trial with their co-defendants the NBPP.
The inflamation of this case lies directly and completely with the news media's attempt to make a profit and further a political agenda by using racial overtones. The news media needs to be on trial with their co-defendants the NBPP.
Please provide some documentation for this verbiage. At the bond hearing, GZ had let his hair grow out and there was no evidence of any scarring from head wounds. Hair doesn't grow in scar tissue. My brother had several cuts to the head, and when he had a buzz cut, similar to what GZ now has, you could see the scars plainly.
.
Here's some of the transcript from the bond hearing. Galbreath is the state's lead investigator for this case:
Quote:
O’MARA: The injuries seem to be consistent with his story, though, don’t they?
Dale; The injuries are consistent with a harder object striking the back of his head than his head was.
O’MARA: Could that be cement?
GILBREATH: Could be.
O’MARA: Did you just say it was consistent or did you say it wasn’t consistent?
GILBREATH: I said it was.
Here some more from the bond hearing regarding other key aspects of the case:
Quote:
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So do you know who started the fight?
GILBREATH: Do I know?
O’MARA: Right.
GILBREATH: No.
O’MARA: Do you have any evidence that supports who may have started the fight?
GILBREATH: No.
Quote:
O’MARA: That statement that he had given you — sorry, law enforcement that day, that we just talked about, turning around and that he was assaulted, do you have any evidence in your investigation to date that specifically contradicts either of those two pieces of evidence that were in his statement given several hours after the event?
GILBREATH: Which two?
O’MARA: That he turned back to his car. We’ll start with that one.
GILBREATH: I have nothing to indicate he did not or did not to that.
O’MARA: My question was do you have any evidence to contradict or that conflicts with his contention given before he knew any of the evidence that would conflict with the fact that he stated I walked back to my car? GILBREATH: No.
O’MARA: No evidence. Correct?
GILBREATH: Understanding — are you talking about at that point in time?
O’MARA: Since. Today. Do you have any evidence that conflicts with his suggestion that he had turned around and went back to his car?
GILBREATH: Other than his statement, no.
O’MARA: Any evidence that conflicts with that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He answered it. He said no.
Really? They didn't know about Zimmerman's prior arrests. Or maybe they didn't care.
Then why did his parents not know what had happened until days later? Why didn't the police look at Trayvon's phone? His parents should have known what happened IMMEDIATELY. Cops are not dummies? Than what were they?
That's not true. Trayvon's mom has said that wasn't true. Trayvon's mom said his dad went to bed not worried about him assuming he had gone to the movies with his cousin. When the dad woke up the next morning and realizde Trayvon wasn't there, he became concerned and called the police. An officer came to their house and asked for a picture of Trayvon. When his dad showed him a picture, the officer in turn showed Trayvon's father a picture of Trayvon's body and asked him if that was his son.
That was the next morning.
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.
Really don't care.
