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.
Whether or not you choose to read them is up to you.
I've been pretty much on and off the Zimmerman/Martin threads for days. I have not seen anything that has "poked holes" in the integrity or expertise of the voice experts. You did post this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime
I'm sorry that I have not seen any information proving that it was zimmerman screaming can you provide that information?
To which you responded with this...
Quote:
I have not seen any information proving it was Trayvon Martin screaming, can you provide that information?
...so based on that, I have a feeling that these" poked holes" have more holes than anything else.
I've been pretty much on and off the Zimmerman/Martin threads for days. I have not seen anything that has "poked holes" in the integrity or expertise of the voice experts. You did post this...
To which you responded with this...
...so based on that, I have a feeling that these" poked holes" have more holes than anything else.
I really don't have the time nor desire to re-post links for you because you can't be bothered to search the threads yourself.
i wanna know where the skittles and ice tea went... no mention about it on the police report.
where did it originate? was it assumed he was armed with skittles and ice tea? why hasn't the martin camp interviewed or post the convenient store surveillance video? that would help convince skeptics like me. it's not hard to find out who was the paramedic that treated zimmerman. why hasn't the martin team not interview him?
the enhanced video of zimmerman's head sure puts the pressure on the martin's camp. this is no longer the search for truth but who can persuade public opinion. we already know most of the news media already condemned zimmerman. the screams are a big issue, some say it's george, others say it's trayvon. the funereal director already chimed in and didn't find defensive wounds or injuries on Trayvon. no defensive wounds or injuries? who has the injuries? would someone with no injuries scream or would someone with injuries scream? we already seen the police report and enhanced video of who has injuries. credibility of experts is also very important. if there are experts that conflict each other, then they are both inadmissible.
the 13 year old's statement was retracted by the mother. does she have any motive to do so? did she fear for her son's safety if she didn't? we still need John to identify himself. he needs to risk his safety to tell the truth. with his face to face interview on who was being beaten (we already know trayvon has no injuries) it will clear up this mess.
the other witnesses to hearing the screams did not see the event. but the media takes their opinion on who was screaming as truth. i'm a musician and really cannot tell just from screams or cries for help if it was trayvon or george. without a base sample of their screams, it's very hard to compare. but then again. who has the injuries and who doesn't? would the screamer have injuries or the attacker? does this form of logic make sense?
it's already been established that zimmerman is not a crazed racist. just listening to the 911 recordings reveals trayvon's skin color was not a factor to zimmerman's attention. how do we know this? he didn't wasn't adamant about it but was hesitant to say trayvon is black. i've dealt with racists before. they are very adamant about the person's skin color.
Last edited by Divine Shadow; 04-05-2012 at 11:15 AM..
Piers Morgan would make an EXCELLENT Prosecutor I just saw him grilling George Zimmerman's two lawyers. I've never seen such persistence for the truth from a journalist anywhere in America. He would not allow Zimmerman's lawyers to whitewash the murder of Trayvon Martin and make it seem like Zimmerman was the victim. Piers kept pushing for facts and you could see the agitation building on the face of the lawyers.
The lawyers, recognizing they won't have their way, relented and accused Piers of attempting to try the case in the media. Piers stood his ground (no pun intended) and said he is only interested in getting to the truth. It made for electrifying television.
It is amazing how little you comprehended from that interview. I saw no whitewashing, what I heard were factual statements regarding the complete lack of any legally admissible evidence against Zimmerman. What I heard when I watched it were numerous instances where Piers Morgan repeated false accusations and demonstrated how ignorant he is in regard to the law and the facts of this case, in addition to the attorney's having to explain the facts to Piers and educate him regarding why he was wrong.
Piers starts out by saying Zimmerman should turn himself in. The attorney's pointed out that there is no warrant and no legal authority looking for him so there is no one that he could turn himself in to.
Piers claimed that justice was not being done because Zimmerman has not been arrested. The attorney pointed out that Zimmerman has not been arrested because there is no legally admissible evidence against him.
Piers claimed that there is a law prohibiting a neighborhood watch member from carrying a firearm. False again, there is no such law. There may be a little handbook somewhere that recommends against it, but that is not the law and does not override Zimmerman's licensed and first amendment right to carry a concealed weapon or to defend himself. The lawyers pointed out that Zimmerman was legally armed while he was on the way to the store when he saw what someone that he did not recognize as belonging in the neighborhood and decided to investigate. He was no legal obligation to remove his weapon and lock it in the trunk of his car.
Piers claimed that there was no evidence that Martin assaulted Zimmerman. The attorney's pointed out that was not true, the sole eye witness who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman beating him before he was shot.
Piers claimed that the Police ordered Zimmerman to not follow Martin. The attorney's again pointed out that is not true, all the Police dispatcher said was "We don't need you to do that". That is not an order or a prohibition, but it is an example of how the news reporting has distorted the facts, claiming otherwise. But again, according to Zimmerman's account, that occurred after he had already been following Martin, and at that point in time he said "Okay" (it is on the recording) and he turned around and headed back to his car.
In regard to Piers claim that Zimmerman's nose was not broken, his attorney responded: "I can state for a fact that his nose was broken".
The only lawfully taken eye witness report that exists today confirms that Martin was on top of and beating Zimmerman.
They stated several times that Zimmerman was entitled to defend himself after being attacked by Martin.
That there is no evidence that Zimmerman broke any laws.
That, "if the grand jury hears the all of the evidence that we know to exist, and they apply the law as it exists in Florida, not Great Britian, then he will not be arrested in the next few days, or the next few weeks, or ever. It will come down with what is called a "no true bill", they will make the determination that all of the evidence, forensics and otherwise, is consistent with his explanation of self defense. That is what Florida law calls for, it doesn't call for "arrest him and then make him prove their innocence in court".
In my opinion Piers Morgan came of looking like another media fool and an imbecile with no understanding of the law. Piers is an idiot who could not prosecute his way out of a paper bag.
You are correct that Trayvon was not bothering anyone while he was casing houses, however he did bother someone when he decided to violently confront and beat George Zimmerman as confirmed by an eye witness.
Now, that's an opinion I can answer. By the way, the eyewitness never said he confronted Zimmerman. One "anonymous" person said he saw them fighting and Zimmerman was on top. Others, including a woman who was willing to go on TV, not only said she saw Zimmerman straddling his body, but she told the police officer on the scene that Martin was calling for help and he corrected her. We keep hearing leaks about anonymous witnesses. Maybe they are simply afraid to come forward, maybe they're waiting until they're called as witnesses in court, or maybe they don't exist.
In any case, back to my other comment, you have to admit all the other garbage you wrote about stealing candy and iced tea is way over-the-top. Let me tell you a story. I was recruited by a manager who had an ad in the paper. I don't need to get specific or go too off-topic here about my life, but it was obviously for a job. We met and he looked/spoke like a polished, well educated young man in his late 20s or early 30s, who had built a successful business. I decided to check him out online and came across his Facebook page. OMG! Naked women, party photos, drinking on his boat with his buddies, mooning, etc. When I told him I changed my mind, he asked me why. I said, "I saw your Facebook page." There was dead silence on the phone. I bet he took it down that afternoon. My point is that everyone fools around on the internet, and sometimes it's really, really stupid, since those silly pictures of you smoking a joint or flashing your breasts might haunt you the rest of your life. Martin was a 17 year old teenager trying to look cool. What he wrote on his Facebook page is no different from thousands of other kids who listen to gansta rap and are defiant, simply because they're in high school!
Theres a big difference between an arrest and a conviction anyway. The FACT is had he been a convicted of domestic violence or anything similar he would not have had a permit to carry. But regardless nothing in his past has much to do with that night.
I know this wasnt directed at me, but I feel I'm being objective. I have two boys and can certainly sympathize with Trayvons parents. But I'm also a home owner in a neighborhood where people get robbed. Personally I'v had vehicles broken into several times in my yard & things stolen from my porch. If I see a strange person, young or old, black or white, walking on my street at night in the rain and feel like watching him I will, if I feel like walking down the street to see whats up I will. The way I see it, the way any impartial rational person should see it, is I have as much right to be on the street as anyone else. My presence on a street after dark in the rain is NO justification for an assault on my person, if I engage that person in dialog its still no justification for an assault. You guys seem to think that because this Zimmerman decided to follow Trayvon he deserved to be attacked? You think that because he confronted him, which by the way is suggested by nothing we have seen on the episode yet, but you think that if he confronted him that was reason for attack? Yet being attacked was not justification for Zimmerman to defend himself? Seems absurd, its ok to jump somebody for being behind you at night on a public street, and its ok to attack somebody because they asked you a question, but its not ok to respond to a violent attack with violence.
What I took away from this & told my sons was dont put yourself in such a position if you can help it, if you find yourself in such a position act intelligently. If an adult asks you what your up to just say I'm coming home from the store, if you are afraid dial 911, if you really think somethings going on get out of there. This young man did none of these common sense things. When he first saw Zimmerman on the phone watching him he could have simply said "Can I help you" and difused the situation, instead he ran. He could have kept running & gotten away, instead he either laid in wait or came back. He could have called 911, but instead he attacked a concerened citizen.
Mistakes were made by both of them. But at the end of the day I cant feel Zimmerman was wrong for defending himself once attacked. At that point everything that went on before is pretty irrelevant. What matters ishow the fight itself actually started. Since Zimmerman had a gun it doesnt make sense that he would have attacked Trayvon, if anything he would have held him at gun point and Trayvon would have probably complied. Had that went on I'd say Zimmerman was definately wrong. But the fact is Zimmerman was being beaten by Trayvon and defended himself. I feel very safe saying thats what went on simply because the police let him go.
Its been a very long time since people were not charged for killing a black person simply because they were white, which is what the entire premise of Zimmermans guilt despite being released from custody is based on, and he's not even white.
Since we're all just speculating here while we wait for the results of the parallel investigations, and we only have one side of the story, from the killer, I agree with this point that I have bolded, but think it could have gone down this way:
Trayvon has been followed for more than two minutes by a stranger, so he runs to put some distance between him and the stranger. He sees that the stranger continues to follow him, so he stops to confront this man. The man approaches Trayvon and says, "What are you doing here?" Trayvon replies, "None of your business."
The man grabs Trayvon's arm and says, "I want you to wait right here." Trayvon pulls his arm away, at which time Zimmerman reaches for his cellphone to notify the dispatcher of his location. Trayvon, sensing that Zimmerman is reaching for a weapon, decks him, and then wrestles with him on the ground. One of them screams for help, and then Zimmerman fires his weapon into the body of Trayvon Martin, killing him.
I don't buy into the racist theories, simply because it was more like "burglar" profiling, as eight previous burglars were black. Also, it's clear now to most people that Zimmerman said, "F'n cold," not "F'n coons." I do believe that this volunteer watch captain violated Neighborhood Watch policies, and so does the National Sheriffs' Association.
"When 28-year-old George Zimmerman was discovered by Sanford, Florida police standing over the body of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, they accepted Zimmerman's claim that he killed in self-defense as a neighborhood watch captain. Now, through a statement released by the National Sheriffs' Association (NSA) -- the parent organization of USAonWatch-Neighborhood Watch -- it has been revealed that Zimmerman was not a member of any group recognized by the organization. Zimmerman violated the central tenets of Neighborhood Watch by following Martin, confronting him and carrying a concealed weapon.http://http://www.thegrio.com/specials/trayvon-martin/zimmerman-not-a-member-of-recognized-neighborhood-watch-organization.php (broken link)
George Zimmerman had a history of violence, and may not have been the right person for that community's watch program. A friend and supporter, Frank Taffe, who speaks highly of Zimmerman, also said,"I think he had fed-up issues. He was mad as hell and wasn't going to take it anymore.”
One life is lost and another may be ruined, as Zimmerman not only may be charged in both criminal and civil cases, but he has to live with the knowledge that he took the life of an innocent teenager, who died because he was walking while black.
Last edited by JustPassinThru; 04-05-2012 at 11:36 AM..
Theres a big difference between an arrest and a conviction anyway. The FACT is had he been a convicted of domestic violence or anything similar he would not have had a permit to carry. But regardless nothing in his past has much to do with that night.
I know this wasnt directed at me, but I feel I'm being objective. I have two boys and can certainly sympathize with Trayvons parents. But I'm also a home owner in a neighborhood where people get robbed. Personally I'v had vehicles broken into several times in my yard & things stolen from my porch. If I see a strange person, young or old, black or white, walking on my street at night in the rain and feel like watching him I will, if I feel like walking down the street to see whats up I will. The way I see it, the way any impartial rational person should see it, is I have as much right to be on the street as anyone else. My presence on a street after dark in the rain is NO justification for an assault on my person, if I engage that person in dialog its still no justification for an assault. You guys seem to think that because this Zimmerman decided to follow Trayvon he deserved to be attacked? You think that because he confronted him, which by the way is suggested by nothing we have seen on the episode yet, but you think that if he confronted him that was reason for attack? Yet being attacked was not justification for Zimmerman to defend himself? Seems absurd, its ok to jump somebody for being behind you at night on a public street, and its ok to attack somebody because they asked you a question, but its not ok to respond to a violent attack with violence.
What I took away from this & told my sons was dont put yourself in such a position if you can help it, if you find yourself in such a position act intelligently. If an adult asks you what your up to just say I'm coming home from the store, if you are afraid dial 911, if you really think somethings going on get out of there. This young man did none of these common sense things. When he first saw Zimmerman on the phone watching him he could have simply said "Can I help you" and difused the situation, instead he ran. He could have kept running & gotten away, instead he either laid in wait or came back. He could have called 911, but instead he attacked a concerened citizen.
Mistakes were made by both of them. But at the end of the day I cant feel Zimmerman was wrong for defending himself once attacked. At that point everything that went on before is pretty irrelevant. What matters is how the fight itself actually started. Since Zimmerman had a gun it doesnt make sense that he would have attacked Trayvon, if anything he would have held him at gun point and Trayvon would have probably complied. Had that went on I'd say Zimmerman was definately wrong. But the fact is Zimmerman was being beaten by Trayvon and defended himself. I feel very safe saying thats what went on simply because the police let him go.
Its been a very long time since people were not charged for killing a black person simply because they were white, which is what the entire premise of Zimmermans guilt despite being released from custody is based on, and he's not even white.
I don't think you are being objective. If Zimmerman was attacked, if Trayvon was the aggressor and Zimmerman's life was in danger, no one is saying that he is wrong for defending himself. The point is that we don't know that that is what happened. We don't know that Zimmerman was standing his ground or if Trayvon Martin was standing his. The police are not perfect and history has shown us that the police have made mistakes.
It is your opinion that Trayvon was the aggressor and that Zimmerman is telling the truth, but there are others in law enforcement who believe that the investigation was not thorough and even the police report was not detailed enough. There are conficting eyewitness accounts. If this was one of your boys, would you simply accept the word of George Zimmerman and the police department? Trayvon did not have a history of violence, his parents don't believe that he would wait behind a building and attack someone and they believe that it was him screaming for help. Why should they simply believe what GZ said? After a thorough investigation, let's let the jury decide. If the evidence shows that Zimmerman was attacked then so be it...we just want justice served one way or another and GZ word is not enough.
I thought it sounded like "f-ing cold" from the beginning. I'm glad everyone is finally dismissing this racial slur nonsense. It's easy to think you hear something if you WANT to hear it.
Everyone? Don't bet on it.
That ruins another part of their
packaging of Zimmerman as a racist.
So, the big news today is that the racial slur was nonsense. Any reasonable person already knew you could not make out jack from that recording. It's almost like nobody at CNN ever listened to 'Stairway to Heaven' backwards as a kid. The human brain is a marvelous thing, ain't it :-)
So just in case you're having trouble keeping up, here's a running tally of all the lies the media has told so far. I'm sure I am forgetting something, so forgive the incomplete nature of this list:
1) Zimmerman is white (oops, hispanic)
2) Zimmerman suffered no injuries (oh wait he had a broken nose and gashed head)
3) Zimmerman chased down the "victim" (oh wait that's just conjecture we actually have no evidence for that)
4) Zimmerman uttered a racial slur (lol jk no he didn't!)
5) Zimmerman told dispatch suspect was black (ps, that was only after they specifically asked and he seemed unsure)
6) Trayvon was much smaller than Zimmerman (actually he was much taller, an amateur fighter, and only 20 lbs lighter and in better shape)
7) Trayvon was a good kid and could never possibly start an altercation (yet he happened to be suspended multiple times very recently, possibly dealt drugs, abused codeine, may have been engaged in burglary and identity theft, and assaulted a bus driver)
8) The screams are not Zimmerman (oh wait a witness id'd Zim as the one screaming and the "audio experts" were not qualified sound engineers)
*****
This is a good time to ask: what, precisely, is the evidence that the race baiters have against Zimmerman? The only thing I can think of is the phone call to Trayvon's gf - but her account is ambiguous and does not prove anything. And it's unreliable since she only came out of the woodwork after Sharpton et al. stuck their noses in this.
Last edited by needTXinfo; 04-05-2012 at 12:00 PM..
Z's gun was concealed, TM did not know he had a gun, If he did, the out come might have been different and TM may have responded differently, like yes sir, no sir as it should have been.
Which is why I think it is idiotic for those with gun carry permits to be required to conceal them.
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.
