If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC)   George Zimmerman released from jail on $150,000 bail   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 613
    More: Followup, second mortgages, Seminole County, Jesse Jackson, Jr, Comic Book Legal Defense Fund  
•       •       •

3307 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Apr 2012 at 1:35 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



613 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-23 12:27:08 PM

YouPeopleAreCrazy: s2s2s2: The eyewitness confirmed it was Zimmerman getting his ass beat.

No. He said he believes Martin was on top during the part of the scuffle that he saw. It is entirely possible to be 'on top' for a period of time, and not be "beating the shiat out of" your opponent.

It is also entirely possible for the situation to have reversed during the time that 'John' went inside to call 911.

No one saw.
We do not know.

We DO know that there is a dead teenager.


I love it. Teenager does nothing wrong, gets shot, dies. Shooter does nothing wrong, walks free.

JUSTICE, Florida style.

/Do they at least revoke his CCW license?
//All I know about that is that conviction of a felony bars you from carrying in FL... not sure about a case like this.
 
2012-04-23 12:31:21 PM

PoochUMD: The other had no injuries aside from the gunshot wound.


Including bruising of the fists that would be consistent with giving a man a bloody nose.

But it's really good to see that the fark lawyer brigade has the facts at hand and is ready to spin the wheel of justice.
 
2012-04-23 12:31:23 PM

squirrelflavoredyogurt: divx88: brainscab: I want to know if this guy studied the self defense laws before he went out to pick a fight with a gun in his pocket,

Curious if any of you have half a brain.

Court system swayed by lynch mobs and slant media, prosecutors not submitting all evidence to a case (which is illegal), dead or alive bounties (which is illegal). Obnoxious "murder 2" charge, when the only thing really unclear is if Zimmerman provoked Trayvon; which in that case it'd be man slaughter.

Funny that they use a picture of Trayvon at 12 years of age.

[sadhillnews.com image 547x410]

So yes, put down your STOLEN skittles and tea and stop acting shady.

Can't really play the black card either given no charges have been brought on the leader of the BP for issuing a dead or alive bounty.

I find it funny that stalking someone, then gunning them down is your idea of manslaughter. I'd say that when being followed by an older man, Trayvon had a right to attack Zimmerman under Florida's stand your ground laws.

Link of the 911 call from Zimmerman where he admits to following Trayvon, is told not to, then says Trayvon ran. Somehow Trayvon ended up dead by Zimmerman's gun, but we're supposed to believe it's because Zimmerman stood his ground, not Trayvon.


Have you listened to it? You can clearly tell when Zimmerman gets out of his car, starts running and stops once the dispatcher tells him he doesn't have to follow Martin. Somehow Martin ended up dead 20' from that spot 3 minutes later.

This isn't a case of one party chasing the other, it's a case of someone hiding in the vicinity or doubling back to confront the person following them earlier.
 
2012-04-23 12:33:18 PM

Bontesla: There's one witness who said the entire event took place on grass and that Zimmerman was uninjured. The police took his statement and he was also interviewed by Anderson Cooper. He remains anonymous.


Citation?

He said that zimmerman was being beaten, where did he say zimmerman was uninjured fromt hat beating?

He said "on grass" or not on the street?
 
2012-04-23 12:33:30 PM

Gyrfalcon: bonefish: I find it interesting you can follow someone around until they turn on you pissed off, then just kill them, totally legal. So intriguing, if you're willing to go through the trouble.

Only in some states. In some states, you'll be looking at a murder charge.


I think disgust over the shabby state of Florida's legal system where such a thing could happen legally is justified.
 
2012-04-23 12:33:35 PM

PoochUMD: You can clearly tell


Which is why it's case-closed. Thanks for telling us what is clear in this case, and what isn't. Surely with your expertise you'll be taking the Zimmerman case pro bono! You could really make a name for yourself with this kind of legal analysis.
 
2012-04-23 12:34:29 PM

friendinpa: People want to break this down to guns or race, but what about simple manners and respect for other people?

GZ: Hi there, how are you doing tonight?

TM: Fine, thank you.

GZ: I haven't seen you around here before, I'm George, I help out with the community watch in this neighborhood.

TM: Hello George, I'm Treyvon, I'm staying with my Dad for a little while, he lives at (enter street address)

GZ: Ok Treyvon, have a great night and welcome to the neighborhood.

Manners. Because pretending you are a cop or a thug is not worth getting arrested or dead.


I smart you.
 
2012-04-23 12:34:46 PM

BeesNuts: PoochUMD: The other had no injuries aside from the gunshot wound.

Including bruising of the fists that would be consistent with giving a man a bloody nose.

But it's really good to see that the fark lawyer brigade has the facts at hand and is ready to spin the wheel of justice.


I'm no doctor, but I can't imagine that breaking someones nose is automatically going to bruise a fist.
 
2012-04-23 12:36:05 PM

Bontesla: There were multiple witnesses. One of which actually witnessed the struggle. The police have not released his statement - but he has come forward saying Zimmerman's account is factually inaccurate


He has come forward and backed up Zimmerman's account of being beaten, and of calling for help.

We have citations for this.

You have made the claim that he said zimmerman was uninjured and on the grass, yet you have provided no citations for that.

Given your dishonesty thus far (by claiming other witnesses contradict "John" even though they were in no position to know who yelled for help) I am going to mark your claims as BS until you can prove them.
 
2012-04-23 12:36:08 PM

PoochUMD: BeesNuts: PoochUMD: The other had no injuries aside from the gunshot wound.

Including bruising of the fists that would be consistent with giving a man a bloody nose.

But it's really good to see that the fark lawyer brigade has the facts at hand and is ready to spin the wheel of justice.

I'm no doctor, but I can't imagine that breaking someones nose is automatically going to bruise a fist.


I'm no doctor, but I'm currently farking an ER nurse and she and I both believe the mechanism for bruising stops once the source of blood pressure stops.
 
2012-04-23 12:37:13 PM

BeesNuts: PoochUMD: You can clearly tell

Which is why it's case-closed. Thanks for telling us what is clear in this case, and what isn't. Surely with your expertise you'll be taking the Zimmerman case pro bono! You could really make a name for yourself with this kind of legal analysis.


Listen to the tape. I'd be worried if you couldn't identify the sound of a car door closing and a man running. Unless he's some evil genius calling from inside a foley studio.
 
2012-04-23 12:37:35 PM

algrant33: friendinpa: People want to break this down to guns or race, but what about simple manners and respect for other people?

GZ: Hi there, how are you doing tonight?

TM: Fine, thank you.

GZ: I haven't seen you around here before, I'm George, I help out with the community watch in this neighborhood.

TM: Hello George, I'm Treyvon, I'm staying with my Dad for a little while, he lives at (enter street address)

GZ: Ok Treyvon, have a great night and welcome to the neighborhood.

Manners. Because pretending you are a cop or a thug is not worth getting arrested or dead.

I smart you.


I dunno. I don't think it's very good manners to expect random people to explain themselves when they are just walking home from the corner store. In fact, I think it's downright rude to assume someone else is suspicious without a really good reason.
 
2012-04-23 12:38:47 PM

Carth: Bontesla: liam76: Satanic_Hamster: liam76: On top of that the only eyewitness to see the struggle and to see someoen call for help has confirmed it was Zimmerman calling for help.

Oh come on, lliam. This thread has nothing to do with Israel, why do you have to lie about things?

Then why bring it up?

"The guy on the bottom, who I believe had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help, help.' I told him to stop, I was calling 911," John told the TV station. Zimmerman was wearing red.

Your ignorance doesn't make what I say a lie.

And witnesses Mary Cutcher and Selma Mora Lamilla disagree with John's statements.

Aren't they the ones who admitted to not seeing the shooting nor the preceding altercation and the police said were inconsistent with what she told police?


I don't know of any inconsistencies but yes - they only looked out after the shooting. But everyone claiming to see the shooting also talked about it being dark. . . Hard to see.

They can testify to what they heard and what they saw afterward. Their testimony contradicts Zimmerman's.
 
2012-04-23 12:42:04 PM

Bontesla: Carth: Bontesla: liam76: Satanic_Hamster: liam76: On top of that the only eyewitness to see the struggle and to see someoen call for help has confirmed it was Zimmerman calling for help.

Oh come on, lliam. This thread has nothing to do with Israel, why do you have to lie about things?

Then why bring it up?

"The guy on the bottom, who I believe had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help, help.' I told him to stop, I was calling 911," John told the TV station. Zimmerman was wearing red.

Your ignorance doesn't make what I say a lie.

And witnesses Mary Cutcher and Selma Mora Lamilla disagree with John's statements.

Aren't they the ones who admitted to not seeing the shooting nor the preceding altercation and the police said were inconsistent with what she told police?

I don't know of any inconsistencies but yes - they only looked out after the shooting. But everyone claiming to see the shooting also talked about it being dark. . . Hard to see.

They can testify to what they heard and what they saw afterward. Their testimony contradicts Zimmerman's.


What's the contradiction? And is a contradiction after the shooting really relevant?
 
2012-04-23 12:42:34 PM

PoochUMD: karmaceutical: nekom: karmaceutical: I think you could convince a jury that the sky is yellow and the sun is blue. I am not talking about what a jury can be convinced of or not... I am talking about what is painfully evident on that tape.

It does help to paint a picture, but there are still no eye witnesses, and as far as I'm aware, no evidence which disproves Zimmerman's side of the story, which again may be an outright lie but what else can they go by? The burden of proof for a criminal trial is simply too high, I will be shocked if they actually convict.

All the tape shows is one person screaming for help for 15 seconds before a single shot is fired. We have a body. We have a gun. We have a shooter. The shooter claims he was shooting in self defense. I think the 911 tape disputes that theory. The jury will have to make its own decision based on that evidence. You can argue that no one can prove that the child-like screaming on the tape was Zimmerman or Martin. The only thing that matters is what the jury believes.

The eye witness says that it was Zimmerman screaming for help.


Right. In the dark. With the two faces inches from each other. That seems legitimate.
 
2012-04-23 12:42:46 PM

Bontesla: They can testify to what they heard and what they saw afterward. Their testimony contradicts Zimmerman's


No it doesn't.

They testified they didn't hear a scuffle. If they were on the other side of their house when it was going on they may not hear the scuffle, but could hear the yell for help and the gunfire.
 
2012-04-23 12:45:09 PM

nekom: karmaceutical: All the tape shows is one person screaming for help for 15 seconds before a single shot is fired. We have a body. We have a gun. We have a shooter. The shooter claims he was shooting in self defense. I think the 911 tape disputes that theory. The jury will have to make its own decision based on that evidence. You can argue that no one can prove that the child-like screaming on the tape was Zimmerman or Martin. The only thing that matters is what the jury believes.

What exactly does the screaming prove though? He may have been trying to get the gun during/after, there's a LOT of different things that may have happened, we just don't know. I don't see how a jury can find for murder with so little to work with.


The assumption is for murder. The defense has to pove self-defense.
 
2012-04-23 12:45:25 PM

Bontesla:
Right. In the dark. With the two faces inches from each other. That seems legitimate.


Yet you think women who have never heard martin or zimmerman before can identify which one was screaming without having seent he confrontation?

Seems to me any witness who agrees with what you want to have happened gets a pass and any eyewitness who disagrees gets ignored.
 
2012-04-23 12:46:29 PM

Bontesla: The assumption is for murder. The defense has to pove self-defense


Not familiar with innocent until proven guilty, are you?
 
2012-04-23 12:48:05 PM

liam76: Bontesla: The assumption is for murder. The defense has to pove self-defense

Not familiar with innocent until proven guilty, are you?


That doesn't apply when you as the defendant ADMIT you killed the guy, but are trying to argue a mitigating circumstance.
 
2012-04-23 12:48:29 PM

liam76: Bontesla: And witnesses Mary Cutcher and Selma Mora Lamilla disagree with John's statements

Too bad they werent; eyewitnesses like john and were guessing who yelled for help without ever hearing the voice of Martin or Zimmerman.

Bontesla: We have an injury with conflicting reports of how that injury was sustained

Where are the conflicting reports coming from? Mary and Slema didn't see the altercation.


They were witnesses and will be treated as such by both sides. What they describe is inconsistent with Zimmerman's account.

The anonymous witness that came forward on Andersoon Cooper provides another account that is in contradiction. I can't like from my phone but feel free to Google.
 
2012-04-23 12:48:50 PM

Bontesla: PoochUMD: karmaceutical: nekom: karmaceutical: I think you could convince a jury that the sky is yellow and the sun is blue. I am not talking about what a jury can be convinced of or not... I am talking about what is painfully evident on that tape.

It does help to paint a picture, but there are still no eye witnesses, and as far as I'm aware, no evidence which disproves Zimmerman's side of the story, which again may be an outright lie but what else can they go by? The burden of proof for a criminal trial is simply too high, I will be shocked if they actually convict.

All the tape shows is one person screaming for help for 15 seconds before a single shot is fired. We have a body. We have a gun. We have a shooter. The shooter claims he was shooting in self defense. I think the 911 tape disputes that theory. The jury will have to make its own decision based on that evidence. You can argue that no one can prove that the child-like screaming on the tape was Zimmerman or Martin. The only thing that matters is what the jury believes.

The eye witness says that it was Zimmerman screaming for help.

Right. In the dark. With the two faces inches from each other. That seems legitimate.


More legitimate than twisting events around to make them fit what you think happened.
 
2012-04-23 12:49:05 PM

algrant33: liam76: Bontesla: The assumption is for murder. The defense has to pove self-defense

Not familiar with innocent until proven guilty, are you?

That doesn't apply when you as the defendant ADMIT you killed the guy, but are trying to argue a mitigating circumstance.


...and assuming the state can make a prima facie case for Murder Two against you. Once the state has held up its end of the bargain, it's up to you to craft your way out of it.
 
2012-04-23 12:52:37 PM

liam76: Bontesla: And two witnesses to contradict your one

I will repeat what I said before.

Too bad they weren't eyewitnesses like john and were guessing who yelled for help without ever hearing the voice of Martin or Zimmerman.

Their testimony on who yelled is meaningless as they didn't know what Martin or Zimmerman sounded like.


If you think overhearing an alleged crime is irrelevant then our justice system would like a word with you.

You're looking for the smoking gun: a definitive witness to witness everything in a clear and unquestionable fashion. Given what we know - this doesn't exist.

What both sides will do is use the evidence to paint a story for the jury. Their testimony may be useless. It may be meaningful for either side.
 
2012-04-23 12:53:28 PM
One of the main things we do not is this:
What was the angle and distance of the fatal gunshot?

Contact? 6 inches? 2 feet?
What angle?

The other thing is: who initiated the physical contact?

Answers to these are not known outside of the police and Zimmerman.
Zimmermans apparent wounds prove nothing beyond that he got those wounds from hitting his head on something. Does NOT 'prove' that Martin was beating his ass
Does NOT 'prove' that Martin circled around and tracked him back to the car.
It is NOT 'obvious' who was winning or losing.

All it 'proves' is that Zimmerman hit his head hard enough to draw blood, sometime between leaving his house earlier and the arrival of the police.
Did it probably happen during the scuffle? IMHO, yes, probably. How, exactly, did he hit his head? Only he knows.

But it proves nothing about who was the aggressor, and who was winning or losing.
 
2012-04-23 12:54:40 PM

friendinpa: People want to break this down to guns or race, but what about simple manners and respect for other people?

GZ: Hi there, how are you doing tonight?

TM: Fine, thank you.

GZ: I haven't seen you around here before, I'm George, I help out with the community watch in this neighborhood.

TM: Hello George, I'm Treyvon, I'm staying with my Dad for a little while, he lives at (enter street address)

GZ: Ok Treyvon, have a great night and welcome to the neighborhood.

Manners. Because pretending you are a cop or a thug is not worth getting arrested or dead.


Which is how the depraved argument may come into play. . . And looks to be the Zimmerman's argument.
 
2012-04-23 12:57:54 PM
gimmegimme


I dunno. I don't think it's very good manners to expect random people to explain themselves when they are just walking home from the corner store. In fact, I think it's downright rude to assume someone else is suspicious without a really good reason.

Really? I live on a dead end street in a pretty nice neighborhood. I occasionally engage people who I don't know. Just a polite conversation can clear up quite a lot of confusion and misunderstanding. We have a lot of young children on our street and yes I would like to, and think I have a right to, know why someone is parked in front of my house. No need to assume they are suspicious or act confrontational. Most of the time they are just lost, in one case the gentleman was birding on the golf course nearby. We also occasionally have the police knocking on our door because there is a High School party spot up the hill in the woods and kids will get dropped off on our street because it makes for a shorter hike.

I think that people have every right to politely engage a stranger in their neighborhood. How would you know that he was just walking home from the corner store unless you asked?
 
2012-04-23 12:58:48 PM

Bontesla: liam76: Bontesla: And two witnesses to contradict your one

I will repeat what I said before.

Too bad they weren't eyewitnesses like john and were guessing who yelled for help without ever hearing the voice of Martin or Zimmerman.

Their testimony on who yelled is meaningless as they didn't know what Martin or Zimmerman sounded like.

If you think overhearing an alleged crime is irrelevant then our justice system would like a word with you.

You're looking for the smoking gun: a definitive witness to witness everything in a clear and unquestionable fashion. Given what we know - this doesn't exist.


They heard nothing that contradicts zimmerman's testimony. Stop lying.

You are ignoring the one witness who saw the scuffle because ti doesn't fit what you want to have happened.
 
2012-04-23 01:00:43 PM

friendinpa: gimmegimme


I dunno. I don't think it's very good manners to expect random people to explain themselves when they are just walking home from the corner store. In fact, I think it's downright rude to assume someone else is suspicious without a really good reason.

Really? I live on a dead end street in a pretty nice neighborhood. I occasionally engage people who I don't know. Just a polite conversation can clear up quite a lot of confusion and misunderstanding. We have a lot of young children on our street and yes I would like to, and think I have a right to, know why someone is parked in front of my house. No need to assume they are suspicious or act confrontational. Most of the time they are just lost, in one case the gentleman was birding on the golf course nearby. We also occasionally have the police knocking on our door because there is a High School party spot up the hill in the woods and kids will get dropped off on our street because it makes for a shorter hike.

I think that people have every right to politely engage a stranger in their neighborhood. How would you know that he was just walking home from the corner store unless you asked?


Your confusion and misunderstanding is your own problem. People have the right to park on a public street. People have the right to walk around on public property. I agree that you have the right to interrogate strangers, but please realize that other folks might mistake your paranoia for other emotions.
 
2012-04-23 01:00:45 PM

PoochUMD: Bontesla: s2s2s2: YouPeopleAreCrazy: No, that is not evidence that Martin attacked first. It indicates that at some point Zimmerman hit his head on something, hard enough to draw blood

That was my point. The major difference is, we do know that at some point, Martin was beating the shiat out of Zimmerman. The only person to sustain injuries other than an instantly fatal gunshot(hint, it was instantly fatal, because of the proximity of Martin to Zimmerman[he was on top of Zimmerman, beating his ass]).

Wrong.

We don't KNOW who was getting beat up. May be both. Maybe Z or maybe M. We don't know - nor do we have enough evidence to make this leap.

One had a broken nose, a bloodied head and was seen being beaten.
The other had no injuries aside from the gunshot wound.

It's pretty obvious Zimmerman was getting beaten up and the only evidence that has come out about Martin is that it didn't appear he was in a fight.


Your response is this:

1. Zimmerman had a broken nose and injuries to the back of the head (still waiting on medical records confirming).
2. Martin had no wounds other than the bullet wound (still waiting on official ME notes and autopsy report to confirm this).
3. Martin was on top of Zimmerman banging his head on the ground (which was wet grass).
4. Zimmerman doesn't fight back but succumbs to the beating until he can draw, disable the safety, and fire (citation needed).

So, aside from being unreasonable and wildly speculative, is there anything else you would like to offer?
 
2012-04-23 01:00:51 PM

Bontesla: They were witnesses and will be treated as such by both sides. What they describe is inconsistent with Zimmerman's account.


Nothing any of the witnesses has said they saw or heard is inconsistent with Zimmerman's account.
 
2012-04-23 01:03:55 PM

PoochUMD: squirrelflavoredyogurt: divx88: brainscab: I want to know if this guy studied the self defense laws before he went out to pick a fight with a gun in his pocket,

Curious if any of you have half a brain.

Court system swayed by lynch mobs and slant media, prosecutors not submitting all evidence to a case (which is illegal), dead or alive bounties (which is illegal). Obnoxious "murder 2" charge, when the only thing really unclear is if Zimmerman provoked Trayvon; which in that case it'd be man slaughter.

Funny that they use a picture of Trayvon at 12 years of age.

[sadhillnews.com image 547x410]

So yes, put down your STOLEN skittles and tea and stop acting shady.

Can't really play the black card either given no charges have been brought on the leader of the BP for issuing a dead or alive bounty.

I find it funny that stalking someone, then gunning them down is your idea of manslaughter. I'd say that when being followed by an older man, Trayvon had a right to attack Zimmerman under Florida's stand your ground laws.

Link of the 911 call from Zimmerman where he admits to following Trayvon, is told not to, then says Trayvon ran. Somehow Trayvon ended up dead by Zimmerman's gun, but we're supposed to believe it's because Zimmerman stood his ground, not Trayvon.

Have you listened to it? You can clearly tell when Zimmerman gets out of his car, starts running and stops once the dispatcher tells him he doesn't have to follow Martin. Somehow Martin ended up dead 20' from that spot 3 minutes later.

This isn't a case of one party chasing the other, it's a case of someone hiding in the vicinity or doubling back to confront the person following them earlier.


So your argument is that hearing the 911 call proves Zimmerman's innocence but the two other witnesses that heard something don't count because they didn't see the altercation.

Got it.
 
2012-04-23 01:04:46 PM

Bontesla: So, aside from being unreasonable and wildly speculative


From the guy who thinks the two women who didn't see the scuffle and have no idea what martin and zimmerman sound like are qualified to testify as to who they heard scream, and from the guy who thinks the actual only eyewitness isn't qualified to say who yelled for help, that is rich.
 
2012-04-23 01:06:35 PM

liam76: Bontesla: There's one witness who said the entire event took place on grass and that Zimmerman was uninjured. The police took his statement and he was also interviewed by Anderson Cooper. He remains anonymous.

Citation?

He said that zimmerman was being beaten, where did he say zimmerman was uninjured fromt hat beating?

He said "on grass" or not on the street?


See Anderson Cooper interview. I already explained that I cannot cite right now... using phone... at work. Sorry...

This witness did not say Zimmerman was being beaten. Where did you get that from?
 
2012-04-23 01:07:14 PM
If they were smart down in Florida you would think they would be closing up the electronic stores and barring the windows against the
coming get your free TV, Arson and window busting splurge heading their way
 
2012-04-23 01:08:16 PM

PoochUMD: BeesNuts: PoochUMD: The other had no injuries aside from the gunshot wound.

Including bruising of the fists that would be consistent with giving a man a bloody nose.

But it's really good to see that the fark lawyer brigade has the facts at hand and is ready to spin the wheel of justice.

I'm no doctor, but I can't imagine that breaking someones nose is automatically going to bruise a fist.


You're also arguing the type of violence you claim left many marks on Zimmerman left none on Martin (offensive or defensive wounds).
 
2012-04-23 01:11:06 PM

liam76: Bontesla: There were multiple witnesses. One of which actually witnessed the struggle. The police have not released his statement - but he has come forward saying Zimmerman's account is factually inaccurate

He has come forward and backed up Zimmerman's account of being beaten, and of calling for help.

We have citations for this.

You have made the claim that he said zimmerman was uninjured and on the grass, yet you have provided no citations for that.

Given your dishonesty thus far (by claiming other witnesses contradict "John" even though they were in no position to know who yelled for help) I am going to mark your claims as BS until you can prove them.


John is not the same witness as the anonymous one I was referring to.

I gave you everything you need to google and explained why I am unable to help you right now. You can either do a little leg work or be called biased for not using your resources to check out a totally verifiable thing.
 
2012-04-23 01:12:28 PM

PoochUMD: BeesNuts: PoochUMD: You can clearly tell

Which is why it's case-closed. Thanks for telling us what is clear in this case, and what isn't. Surely with your expertise you'll be taking the Zimmerman case pro bono! You could really make a name for yourself with this kind of legal analysis.

Listen to the tape. I'd be worried if you couldn't identify the sound of a car door closing and a man running. Unless he's some evil genius calling from inside a foley studio.


Again - either overhearing events is a credible method for gathering evidence or it's not.
 
2012-04-23 01:13:28 PM
Bontesla

Which is how the depraved argument may come into play. . . And looks to be the Zimmerman's argument.

Just to be clear. I doubt that either TM or GZ acted properly. I would venture to guess that they both were confrontational, and that they share responsibility for the tragic outcome. I think that the only reason GZ was charged with 2nd is because the Special Prosecutor knew he could beat it and that by charging him the narrative is changed.
 
2012-04-23 01:14:20 PM

Bontesla: See Anderson Cooper interview. I already explained that I cannot cite right now... using phone... at work. Sorry


And you have already demonstrated your dishonesty, so you don't get the benefit of the doubt.


Bontesla: This witness did not say Zimmerman was being beaten. Where did you get that from


Been linked a couple times. By people other than me too.

A witness to the confrontation just following the shooting stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and punching him, while Zimmerman was yelling for help. This witness, who identified himself as "John", stated that "the guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin#Witness_accou n ts

Odd that you would miss this but find some other gems fromt he interview that nobody else can confirm.
 
2012-04-23 01:14:34 PM

Bontesla: Your response is this:

1. Zimmerman had a broken nose and injuries to the back of the head (still waiting on medical records confirming).
2. Martin had no wounds other than the bullet wound (still waiting on official ME notes and autopsy report to confirm this).
3. Martin was on top of Zimmerman banging his head on the ground (which was wet grass).
4. Zimmerman doesn't fight back but succumbs to the beating until he can draw, disable the safety, and fire (citation needed).

So, aside from being unreasonable and wildly speculative, is there anything else you would like to offer?


1)The defense attorney cited the medical records in the bond hearing.
2) I said the only evidence that has come out regarding Martins injuries was that he had one gunshot wound and didn't appear to be in a fight, which is true.
3) Martin was seen beating Zimmerman's head against the sidewalk which runs directly down a large common grass area between the houses.
4) I don't think I said anything to that extent.
 
2012-04-23 01:15:20 PM

PoochUMD: Bontesla: Carth: Bontesla: liam76: Satanic_Hamster: liam76: On top of that the only eyewitness to see the struggle and to see someoen call for help has confirmed it was Zimmerman calling for help.

Oh come on, lliam. This thread has nothing to do with Israel, why do you have to lie about things?

Then why bring it up?

"The guy on the bottom, who I believe had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help, help.' I told him to stop, I was calling 911," John told the TV station. Zimmerman was wearing red.

Your ignorance doesn't make what I say a lie.

And witnesses Mary Cutcher and Selma Mora Lamilla disagree with John's statements.

Aren't they the ones who admitted to not seeing the shooting nor the preceding altercation and the police said were inconsistent with what she told police?

I don't know of any inconsistencies but yes - they only looked out after the shooting. But everyone claiming to see the shooting also talked about it being dark. . . Hard to see.

They can testify to what they heard and what they saw afterward. Their testimony contradicts Zimmerman's.

What's the contradiction? And is a contradiction after the shooting really relevant?


If their statements made his statements inplausible then yes - it does matter. His story is his defense. If his story is inconsistent then it is significant.

Execute a google search comparing their statements to Zimmerman's. I would provide you with a nice one but I'm @ work. If you'd like to wait for several hours - I could get you one then as well.
 
2012-04-23 01:16:12 PM
 
2012-04-23 01:18:38 PM

Bontesla: PoochUMD: squirrelflavoredyogurt: divx88: brainscab: I want to know if this guy studied the self defense laws before he went out to pick a fight with a gun in his pocket,

Curious if any of you have half a brain.

Court system swayed by lynch mobs and slant media, prosecutors not submitting all evidence to a case (which is illegal), dead or alive bounties (which is illegal). Obnoxious "murder 2" charge, when the only thing really unclear is if Zimmerman provoked Trayvon; which in that case it'd be man slaughter.

Funny that they use a picture of Trayvon at 12 years of age.

[sadhillnews.com image 547x410]

So yes, put down your STOLEN skittles and tea and stop acting shady.

Can't really play the black card either given no charges have been brought on the leader of the BP for issuing a dead or alive bounty.

I find it funny that stalking someone, then gunning them down is your idea of manslaughter. I'd say that when being followed by an older man, Trayvon had a right to attack Zimmerman under Florida's stand your ground laws.

Link of the 911 call from Zimmerman where he admits to following Trayvon, is told not to, then says Trayvon ran. Somehow Trayvon ended up dead by Zimmerman's gun, but we're supposed to believe it's because Zimmerman stood his ground, not Trayvon.

Have you listened to it? You can clearly tell when Zimmerman gets out of his car, starts running and stops once the dispatcher tells him he doesn't have to follow Martin. Somehow Martin ended up dead 20' from that spot 3 minutes later.

This isn't a case of one party chasing the other, it's a case of someone hiding in the vicinity or doubling back to confront the person following them earlier.

So your argument is that hearing the 911 call proves Zimmerman's innocence but the two other witnesses that heard something don't count because they didn't see the altercation.

Got it.


I don't think I said anything about his innocence. I said that the evidence shows that he wasn't actively pursuing Martin with the goal of catching him or confronting him, which I believe to be true.

Martin was likely hiding in the vicinity and he either confronted Zimmerman after he heard the phone call end, or Zimmerman stumbled on his hiding spot (one house over). Who started the physical confrontation is still unknown and the prosecution has stated they have no evidence to prove it was Zimmerman.
 
2012-04-23 01:19:11 PM

PoochUMD: BeesNuts: PoochUMD: The other had no injuries aside from the gunshot wound.

Including bruising of the fists that would be consistent with giving a man a bloody nose.

But it's really good to see that the fark lawyer brigade has the facts at hand and is ready to spin the wheel of justice.

I'm no doctor, but I can't imagine that breaking someones nose is automatically going to bruise a fist.


I see you've never punched someone in the face without gloves on. Give a try some time and report back. You know, after you can type again.
 
2012-04-23 01:20:04 PM

Bontesla: Execute a google search comparing their statements to Zimmerman's. I would provide you with a nice one but I'm @ work. If you'd like to wait for several hours - I could get you one then as well


You have typed about a novel's worth of words in responses but you can't be bothered to type out a link (and your phone has no copy/paste capabilities) to your thus far unknown eyewitness (as far as every thread I have seen on this)?

Sure sounds legit..
 
2012-04-23 01:21:44 PM

Bontesla: If their statements made his statements inplausible then yes - it does matter. His story is his defense. If his story is inconsistent then it is significant.

Execute a google search comparing their statements to Zimmerman's. I would provide you with a nice one but I'm @ work. If you'd like to wait for several hours - I could get you one then as well.


You're talking about someone who saw the aftermath right? If I shoot someone in self defense and then a witness comes out to see what is going on and their recollection of what happened after the shooting differs from my recollection of what happened after the shooting, what does that prove?

That witnesses testimony would have nothing to do with whether or not Zimmerman acted in self defense because it happened after the shooting.
 
2012-04-23 01:28:02 PM

liam76: Bontesla: They can testify to what they heard and what they saw afterward. Their testimony contradicts Zimmerman's

No it doesn't.

They testified they didn't hear a scuffle. If they were on the other side of their house when it was going on they may not hear the scuffle, but could hear the yell for help and the gunfire.


Oh ffs.

They did hear evidence of a struggle. They peaked out the blindes when they continued to hear sounds. It was too dark for them to see anything. It was dark and the only light source was a porch light which obscured Zimmerman's face.

Then they heard the shot - and they went outside.

Cutcher said she saw Zimmerman straddling the body of Martin - holding him down (inconsistent with Zimmerman's account). So, she calls out to him, and he turns but she still can't make out his face. She calls 911. He gets up and paces sayig, "oh God, what have I done?"

They were less than 20 feet away.

Where was John again? His vantage point was amazing.
 
2012-04-23 01:30:34 PM

liam76: Bontesla:
Right. In the dark. With the two faces inches from each other. That seems legitimate.

Yet you think women who have never heard martin or zimmerman before can identify which one was screaming without having seent he confrontation?

Seems to me any witness who agrees with what you want to have happened gets a pass and any eyewitness who disagrees gets ignored.


Where did I say Mora and Cutcher said Martin was screamning? I didn't...

My point was - it would be really difficult for anyone without prior knowledge of either individual to confirm it was one or the other.
 
2012-04-23 01:31:14 PM

algrant33: friendinpa: People want to break this down to guns or race, but what about simple manners and respect for other people?

GZ: Hi there, how are you doing tonight?

TM: Fine, thank you.

GZ: I haven't seen you around here before, I'm George, I help out with the community watch in this neighborhood.

TM: Hello George, I'm Treyvon, I'm staying with my Dad for a little while, he lives at (enter street address)

GZ: Ok Treyvon, have a great night and welcome to the neighborhood.

Manners. Because pretending you are a cop or a thug is not worth getting arrested or dead.

I smart you.


Bullshiat. Utter bullshiat. Hermione Granger is right, several pages back.
Wow. I guess it's back to travel papers for blacks after all.

/remembering ALL the fark threads with folks proudly saying they don't carry identification, no one requires them to carry identification
//remembering ALL the fark threads with folks proudly explaining how they blow past security how dare anyone think they're a thief
///but a lone black boy with a bottle of tea has to stop and identify himself to any asshole like this was South Africa or Jim Crow or slave days
/fk you assholes
 
Displayed 50 of 613 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report