Media: Trayvon Martin the little innocent black boy

[tererun]

If you are a Liberal and therefore a race based hater of all non-minorities, Tererun's position would make perfect sense.

That position has no place in the American legal system, but the current leadership of the DOJ could be Tererun.

It's a shame and a disgrace that we have come to this.

I do find all the people out there supporting zimmerman getting off without ever going to court to be very misguided. there is a legitimate time for the prosecution to not prosecute,. and having them there in the police station that evening to dismiss before they ever even got to court is a huge irregularity on the part of local law enforcement. That may be due to race, it may be due to his family or friends having some pull in the town, or it may just be a gigantic fuck up on their part. Zimmerman should have been charged.

If this is the case i could easily get into a fight with you in florida, shoot you dead, and then walk out the door having never faced much other than a few questions by the cops because it is legal to shoot you. If it is justified i should have to at least put that argument to a court. I have traffic tickets that got more court time than this, and those are such low end violations of the law that I actually would argue those in court to a cop. Even then once the cop has written a ticket I am going to court (If i chose not guilty) even if it is just to wait there for a while to have it dismissed.

Are you people really telling me that shooting a person dead should have less impact than a speeding ticket? is that the america you want to live in?

 

[KissMy]

I do find all the people out there supporting zimmerman getting off without ever going to court to be very misguided. there is a legitimate time for the prosecution to not prosecute,. and having them there in the police station that evening to dismiss before they ever even got to court is a huge irregularity on the part of local law enforcement. That may be due to race, it may be due to his family or friends having some pull in the town, or it may just be a gigantic fuck up on their part. Zimmerman should have been charged.

If this is the case i could easily get into a fight with you in florida, shoot you dead, and then walk out the door having never faced much other than a few questions by the cops because it is legal to shoot you. If it is justified i should have to at least put that argument to a court. I have traffic tickets that got more court time than this, and those are such low end violations of the law that I actually would argue those in court to a cop. Even then once the cop has written a ticket I am going to court (If i chose not guilty) even if it is just to wait there for a while to have it dismissed.

Are you people really telling me that shooting a person dead should have less impact than a speeding ticket? is that the america you want to live in?

You are not grasping the situation. The police wrote you a speeding ticket because they saw you break the law. Justifiable homicide is not illegal. Sounds like you want to make it illegal. No one has to answer questions from cops or prosecutors, everyone has the right to remain silent. If the police do not have evidence proving that Zimmerman's homicide was not justified then they can not charge him. Had they charged him & not been able to convict him within 175 days he would be free for ever. Double jeopardy prevents them from charging him for the same crime twice.

 

[California Girl]

If you are a Liberal and therefore a race based hater of all non-minorities, Tererun's position would make perfect sense.

That position has no place in the American legal system, but the current leadership of the DOJ could be Tererun.

It's a shame and a disgrace that we have come to this.

I do find all the people out there supporting zimmerman getting off without ever going to court to be very misguided. there is a legitimate time for the prosecution to not prosecute,. and having them there in the police station that evening to dismiss before they ever even got to court is a huge irregularity on the part of local law enforcement. That may be due to race, it may be due to his family or friends having some pull in the town, or it may just be a gigantic fuck up on their part. Zimmerman should have been charged.

If this is the case i could easily get into a fight with you in florida, shoot you dead, and then walk out the door having never faced much other than a few questions by the cops because it is legal to shoot you. If it is justified i should have to at least put that argument to a court. I have traffic tickets that got more court time than this, and those are such low end violations of the law that I actually would argue those in court to a cop. Even then once the cop has written a ticket I am going to court (If i chose not guilty) even if it is just to wait there for a while to have it dismissed.

Are you people really telling me that shooting a person dead should have less impact than a speeding ticket? is that the america you want to live in?

I find it fascinating that you think you know as much as the LEOs, prosecutors and defense lawyers in this case. In this country - the US - you are innocent until proven guilty.

I have no real opinion as to his guilt or innocence... but I support the process, which includes not charging anyone if there is insufficient evidence to do so. Seems to me, you lack the ability to distinguish fact from fiction in this case. Twit.

 

[code1211]

If you are a Liberal and therefore a race based hater of all non-minorities, Tererun's position would make perfect sense.

That position has no place in the American legal system, but the current leadership of the DOJ could be Tererun.

It's a shame and a disgrace that we have come to this.

I do find all the people out there supporting zimmerman getting off without ever going to court to be very misguided. there is a legitimate time for the prosecution to not prosecute,. and having them there in the police station that evening to dismiss before they ever even got to court is a huge irregularity on the part of local law enforcement. That may be due to race, it may be due to his family or friends having some pull in the town, or it may just be a gigantic fuck up on their part. Zimmerman should have been charged.

If this is the case i could easily get into a fight with you in florida, shoot you dead, and then walk out the door having never faced much other than a few questions by the cops because it is legal to shoot you. If it is justified i should have to at least put that argument to a court. I have traffic tickets that got more court time than this, and those are such low end violations of the law that I actually would argue those in court to a cop. Even then once the cop has written a ticket I am going to court (If i chose not guilty) even if it is just to wait there for a while to have it dismissed.

Are you people really telling me that shooting a person dead should have less impact than a speeding ticket? is that the america you want to live in?

The facts of the case are not known by me and I suspect are not known by you.

What seems to be apparent is that Zimmerman was a self appointed neighborhood watch kind of a person.

He called the police to report that a person was in a neighborhood that had a history of burglaries and that he was concerned about it.

The police asked him to retreat and it seems that he did.

After that, there are several conflicting stories, but it seems that the two did get into a scuffle and that there were wounds on Zimmerman that could indicate that he was attacked.

Putting all of the stories aside, though, there was something about the circumstances as understood by the police on the night at the scene and later in the interrogation cell that made them believe that this was self defense kind of a shooting.

Do you profess to know more about what happened and possess a greater degree of knowledge of the details than did the police on the scene?

 

[Oldstyle]

So in essence what you're saying is that anyone involved in a homicide is guilty until they prove their innocence?

Anyone who is admittedly involved ina homicide is guilty of killing someone. There is no doubt that zimmerman was there and shot and killed treyvon. So yes he is guilty of killing someone. The question is not whether or not he killed someone which would mean he gets the benefit of being considered innocent of that until the state can provide evidence to him doing the killing. His defense is not that he was innocent at all, but that his killing was justified as per the law which does require a neutral party (AKA the judicial branh0 to decide if his killing fell within the accepted areas of justified homicide. That is what should be judged. had there been little evidence to prosecute zimmerman on a homicide charge because they could not link him to the homicide then you would be correct, but justified homicide is a defense to the homicide charge which was clearly supported by the evidence. That decision was not for the cops to make, and certainly not for a prosecutor who happened to randomly be in the police station for some strange reason when zimmerman was dragged in. Most prosecutors i have seen would not even look at you until you were in court for arraignment. About the best you might get is to make a bail argument if your arraignment is forced to be quick due to lack of bail.

And law enforcement should worry more about "covering themselves from allegations of wrongdoing" then seeing that the law as written is enforced.

Reading not one of your strong suits? Yes, enforcing the law would have been gathering evidence, arresting him, and perhaps setting an initial bail. They would give him an arraignment date dependent on him getting bail. What the police in this case did is to judge his guilt and release him which is certainly not something they should have done in a murder case. Especially not when you have an outright confession to the killing, and absolutely no evidence contrary to the fact that zimmerman killed Treyvon.

Sorry, Tererun but that's not the way our legal system works.

Actually, it is. Police make the initial charge and you make your arguments in court. When the police just dismiss a charge of murder that the defendant has clearly committed that is a blatant show of bias and favoritism.

The police investigate. The District Attorney decides whether or not to prosecute based on the evidence. In the case of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman the prosecutor looked at the evidence and decided not to prosecute. From what's been released so far that would appear to be the correct decision.

The prosecutor never looked at a thing, and most certainly had no business being down at the police station that evening to dismiss charges. If the prosecutor can chose not to prosecute, but that would be something decided at the arraignment when you or your lawyer discuss that option with them. it should have at least made it there with a plea bargain presentation to see if zimmerman caved. Seriously, he shot an unarmed kid just dismissing that in a couple of errors shows a huge problem in how the prosecutor handled the case. Even the police should have gone with their initial reaction and handed it off to the prosecutor to do during arraignment. If they were going to give zimmerman a break they should have ROR'd him saying he was not a danger to the public due to the nature of the crime being potentially self defense.

I'm sorry, Tererun...but you seem to be woefully ignorant about how our legal system functions. First of all, we have a presumption of innocence in the US. You are not "guilty" until you prove that you are innocent...it's the other way around. It's the cornerstone of our court system.

I have no idea why you think that a prosecutor has no business being at a police station...it's their JOB to determine whether or not to pursue a conviction. They look at the evidence that the police have gathered and then make a decision on whether to go forward with charges. In this case the prosecutor looked at a case where a shooter claimed that he was attacked and he fired his weapon and killed Martin because he feared for his life. The evidence that prosecutor looked at that night...9-11 tapes...a diagram of the complex with time lines for where people were when parts of that conversation took place and most importantly of all the physical injuries suffered by George Zimmerman...are what determined that decision. The prosecutor made the call to not press charges because they didn't feel that they had a case they could prosecute successfully. I think that decision was the correct one after seeing the released photos of Zimmerman and viewing the maps of that gated community and the time line of the calls made to police. The police had Martin in custody questioning him for FIVE HOURS. They didn't simply turn him free on a "whim"...they released him because his story was consistent with the crime scene evidence. THAT AND ONLY THAT IS WHAT MATTERS!

You on the other hand have already convicted George Zimmerman because you've bought into the "narrative" that the main stream media and Trayvon Martin's family put out there about a racist vigilante taking the life of an innocent harmless teenager...despite the facts not supporting that narrative. You, my friend...are the problem...not the police in Sanford or the Prosecutor who made the call not to press charges.

 

[American_Jihad]

Please don't start another thread about this when there are already a hundred of them!!!

But, but you got sucked in anyway...

 

[tererun]

If you are a Liberal and therefore a race based hater of all non-minorities, Tererun's position would make perfect sense.

That position has no place in the American legal system, but the current leadership of the DOJ could be Tererun.

It's a shame and a disgrace that we have come to this.

I do find all the people out there supporting zimmerman getting off without ever going to court to be very misguided. there is a legitimate time for the prosecution to not prosecute,. and having them there in the police station that evening to dismiss before they ever even got to court is a huge irregularity on the part of local law enforcement. That may be due to race, it may be due to his family or friends having some pull in the town, or it may just be a gigantic fuck up on their part. Zimmerman should have been charged.

If this is the case i could easily get into a fight with you in florida, shoot you dead, and then walk out the door having never faced much other than a few questions by the cops because it is legal to shoot you. If it is justified i should have to at least put that argument to a court. I have traffic tickets that got more court time than this, and those are such low end violations of the law that I actually would argue those in court to a cop. Even then once the cop has written a ticket I am going to court (If i chose not guilty) even if it is just to wait there for a while to have it dismissed.

Are you people really telling me that shooting a person dead should have less impact than a speeding ticket? is that the america you want to live in?

The facts of the case are not known by me and I suspect are not known by you.

What seems to be apparent is that Zimmerman was a self appointed neighborhood watch kind of a person.

He called the police to report that a person was in a neighborhood that had a history of burglaries and that he was concerned about it.

The police asked him to retreat and it seems that he did.

After that, there are several conflicting stories, but it seems that the two did get into a scuffle and that there were wounds on Zimmerman that could indicate that he was attacked.

Putting all of the stories aside, though, there was something about the circumstances as understood by the police on the night at the scene and later in the interrogation cell that made them believe that this was self defense kind of a shooting.

Do you profess to know more about what happened and possess a greater degree of knowledge of the details than did the police on the scene?

I am aware of more of the facts than you are, but in the end neither of us are in possession of all the evidence. I would argue with your wrong information, but in this case, and it has nothing to do with you, the media really fucked information up. That is the reason why I feel it is right to present it to the court to sort out. Of course things are going to be all over the place.

 

[tjvh]

I've said it before, when Zimmerman gets acquitted let the great 2012 TV smash and grab festivities begin.

 

[NoNukes]

Inconvenient Truths About The Trayvon Martin Shooting​

5/24/12 By Ben Cohen

A large quantity of information about the Trayvon Martin case was recently made public.

This new information constitutes only a small portion of the massive collection of information turned over by the prosecution as part of discovery. Upon reading through the 183 pages of documents, it becomes apparent that George Zimmerman should have never been charged with second degree murder, as I have maintained since the beginning of the controversy at the Daily Kos.

From the onset, media have selectively reported the facts to create a fantasy narrative where George Zimmerman stalked and shot a helpless unarmed teenager. The media ignored the mountain of evidence that suggests that Trayvon Martin was on top of George Zimmerman beating him when he was shot, and that Zimmerman acted out of fear of death or serious injury. The media instead focused on the speculative testimony of Mary Cutcher and Selma Mora Lamilla over an actual eyewitness account from a man identified by the press as “John.” That the rest of the evidence strongly supported “John’s” version of events made the false narrative crafted by the media even more outrageous. When Police Chief Bill Lee released a statement saying that Zimmerman had claimed self-defense and that the evidence supported him, the media attacked Lee. Now that the evidence has come out, we see that it weighs on the side of Police Chief Lee and against the people who attacked him.

George Zimmerman had a broken nose, two black eyes, and lacerations on the back of his head. Trayvon Martin, in contrast, had no injuries aside from the gunshot wound and a small abrasion on his knuckles. Responding officers and paramedics witnessed George Zimmerman’s injuries and medical records confirm them. An eyewitness stated that a man matching George’s description was being pummeled while screaming for help. The lead investigator, who wanted to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter, determined that the voice screaming for help was George Zimmerman’s.

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/05/24/inconvenient-truths-about-the-trayvon-martin-shooting/

6'3"​

Sounds more like Trayvon was acting out of fear of death or serious injury. He was being stalked by a gun toting vigilante.

 

[tjvh]

Inconvenient Truths About The Trayvon Martin Shooting​

5/24/12 By Ben Cohen

A large quantity of information about the Trayvon Martin case was recently made public.

This new information constitutes only a small portion of the massive collection of information turned over by the prosecution as part of discovery. Upon reading through the 183 pages of documents, it becomes apparent that George Zimmerman should have never been charged with second degree murder, as I have maintained since the beginning of the controversy at the Daily Kos.

From the onset, media have selectively reported the facts to create a fantasy narrative where George Zimmerman stalked and shot a helpless unarmed teenager. The media ignored the mountain of evidence that suggests that Trayvon Martin was on top of George Zimmerman beating him when he was shot, and that Zimmerman acted out of fear of death or serious injury. The media instead focused on the speculative testimony of Mary Cutcher and Selma Mora Lamilla over an actual eyewitness account from a man identified by the press as “John.” That the rest of the evidence strongly supported “John’s” version of events made the false narrative crafted by the media even more outrageous. When Police Chief Bill Lee released a statement saying that Zimmerman had claimed self-defense and that the evidence supported him, the media attacked Lee. Now that the evidence has come out, we see that it weighs on the side of Police Chief Lee and against the people who attacked him.

George Zimmerman had a broken nose, two black eyes, and lacerations on the back of his head. Trayvon Martin, in contrast, had no injuries aside from the gunshot wound and a small abrasion on his knuckles. Responding officers and paramedics witnessed George Zimmerman’s injuries and medical records confirm them. An eyewitness stated that a man matching George’s description was being pummeled while screaming for help. The lead investigator, who wanted to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter, determined that the voice screaming for help was George Zimmerman’s.

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/05/24/inconvenient-truths-about-the-trayvon-martin-shooting/

6'3"​

Sounds more like Trayvon was acting out of fear of death or serious injury. He was being stalked by a gun toting vigilante.

So I guess you are one of those with complete disregard for due process, and have already (in your limited mind) tried, and convicted Zimmerman. When he gets acquitted I'm sure you'll be more than happy to smash a few windows, and replace that aging TV with a brand new big screen... And make sure you take some bricks to the heads of innocents along the way to lend more credibility to your cause. Because we all know that Justice in America takes a back seat to "mob rules" mentality.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

He needed to face the courts because that should be what anyone who kills another has to do. Even if it is justified there should be a neutral review of the evidence. Innocent until proven guilty is not applicable here as there is no doubt to his guilt in killing treyvon. That is supposed to keep us from charging people of a crime for harassment purposes with no probable cause at all.

That is stupid.

You want anyone who has to defend themselves or some else to also have to again defend themselves again against the state in court. Such a rule means if a person defends himself against a robber then they must get robbed by the court system. Brainwashed idiot.

Yes, I think if you take someone's life you should have to defend that action in court. Does that clarify it for you because you really seemed to have not understood what I said from your response.

The court systems are at a breaking point right now with people who are charged with actually breaking some kind of law when there is some doubt of their innocence. So now you want to add more too the court system with people who where defending their life? Isn't that something like double jeopardy? Having to defend yourself twice?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So in essence what you're saying is that anyone involved in a homicide is guilty until they prove their innocence?

Anyone who is admittedly involved ina homicide is guilty of killing someone. There is no doubt that zimmerman was there and shot and killed treyvon. So yes he is guilty of killing someone. The question is not whether or not he killed someone which would mean he gets the benefit of being considered innocent of that until the state can provide evidence to him doing the killing. His defense is not that he was innocent at all, but that his killing was justified as per the law which does require a neutral party (AKA the judicial branh0 to decide if his killing fell within the accepted areas of justified homicide. That is what should be judged. had there been little evidence to prosecute zimmerman on a homicide charge because they could not link him to the homicide then you would be correct, but justified homicide is a defense to the homicide charge which was clearly supported by the evidence. That decision was not for the cops to make, and certainly not for a prosecutor who happened to randomly be in the police station for some strange reason when zimmerman was dragged in. Most prosecutors i have seen would not even look at you until you were in court for arraignment. About the best you might get is to make a bail argument if your arraignment is forced to be quick due to lack of bail.

And law enforcement should worry more about "covering themselves from allegations of wrongdoing" then seeing that the law as written is enforced.

Reading not one of your strong suits? Yes, enforcing the law would have been gathering evidence, arresting him, and perhaps setting an initial bail. They would give him an arraignment date dependent on him getting bail. What the police in this case did is to judge his guilt and release him which is certainly not something they should have done in a murder case. Especially not when you have an outright confession to the killing, and absolutely no evidence contrary to the fact that zimmerman killed Treyvon.

Sorry, Tererun but that's not the way our legal system works.

Actually, it is. Police make the initial charge and you make your arguments in court. When the police just dismiss a charge of murder that the defendant has clearly committed that is a blatant show of bias and favoritism.

The police investigate. The District Attorney decides whether or not to prosecute based on the evidence. In the case of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman the prosecutor looked at the evidence and decided not to prosecute. From what's been released so far that would appear to be the correct decision.

The prosecutor never looked at a thing, and most certainly had no business being down at the police station that evening to dismiss charges. If the prosecutor can chose not to prosecute, but that would be something decided at the arraignment when you or your lawyer discuss that option with them. it should have at least made it there with a plea bargain presentation to see if zimmerman caved. Seriously, he shot an unarmed kid just dismissing that in a couple of errors shows a huge problem in how the prosecutor handled the case. Even the police should have gone with their initial reaction and handed it off to the prosecutor to do during arraignment. If they were going to give zimmerman a break they should have ROR'd him saying he was not a danger to the public due to the nature of the crime being potentially self defense.

Anyone who is admittedly involved ina homicide is guilty of killing someone.

This was as far as I got, I could not read any further. Have you ever heard innocent until proven guilty? The police is the first step in the process of collecting evidence if their is any, the next step is taking that evidence to the prosecutor. If they do not find any justification to charge a person then the process ends their. Are you going to be the one to pay for all those court cases of innocent people having to defend their lives in court?

How much do you think it cost to have a court? All those in favor of tererun footing the bill for these types of courts say I.

 

[California Girl]

Inconvenient Truths About The Trayvon Martin Shooting​

5/24/12 By Ben Cohen

A large quantity of information about the Trayvon Martin case was recently made public.

This new information constitutes only a small portion of the massive collection of information turned over by the prosecution as part of discovery. Upon reading through the 183 pages of documents, it becomes apparent that George Zimmerman should have never been charged with second degree murder, as I have maintained since the beginning of the controversy at the Daily Kos.

From the onset, media have selectively reported the facts to create a fantasy narrative where George Zimmerman stalked and shot a helpless unarmed teenager. The media ignored the mountain of evidence that suggests that Trayvon Martin was on top of George Zimmerman beating him when he was shot, and that Zimmerman acted out of fear of death or serious injury. The media instead focused on the speculative testimony of Mary Cutcher and Selma Mora Lamilla over an actual eyewitness account from a man identified by the press as “John.” That the rest of the evidence strongly supported “John’s” version of events made the false narrative crafted by the media even more outrageous. When Police Chief Bill Lee released a statement saying that Zimmerman had claimed self-defense and that the evidence supported him, the media attacked Lee. Now that the evidence has come out, we see that it weighs on the side of Police Chief Lee and against the people who attacked him.

George Zimmerman had a broken nose, two black eyes, and lacerations on the back of his head. Trayvon Martin, in contrast, had no injuries aside from the gunshot wound and a small abrasion on his knuckles. Responding officers and paramedics witnessed George Zimmerman’s injuries and medical records confirm them. An eyewitness stated that a man matching George’s description was being pummeled while screaming for help. The lead investigator, who wanted to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter, determined that the voice screaming for help was George Zimmerman’s.

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/05/24/inconvenient-truths-about-the-trayvon-martin-shooting/

6'3"​

Sounds more like Trayvon was acting out of fear of death or serious injury. He was being stalked by a gun toting vigilante.

From your post, you appear to prefer media hype and bullshit to fact. As you are a liberal, that is not surprising.... however, in this country, in our justice system, media hysteria and hyperbole come second to evidence and facts. Learn to live with that.

 

[California Girl]

I do find all the people out there supporting zimmerman getting off without ever going to court to be very misguided. there is a legitimate time for the prosecution to not prosecute,. and having them there in the police station that evening to dismiss before they ever even got to court is a huge irregularity on the part of local law enforcement. That may be due to race, it may be due to his family or friends having some pull in the town, or it may just be a gigantic fuck up on their part. Zimmerman should have been charged.

If this is the case i could easily get into a fight with you in florida, shoot you dead, and then walk out the door having never faced much other than a few questions by the cops because it is legal to shoot you. If it is justified i should have to at least put that argument to a court. I have traffic tickets that got more court time than this, and those are such low end violations of the law that I actually would argue those in court to a cop. Even then once the cop has written a ticket I am going to court (If i chose not guilty) even if it is just to wait there for a while to have it dismissed.

Are you people really telling me that shooting a person dead should have less impact than a speeding ticket? is that the america you want to live in?

The facts of the case are not known by me and I suspect are not known by you.

What seems to be apparent is that Zimmerman was a self appointed neighborhood watch kind of a person.

He called the police to report that a person was in a neighborhood that had a history of burglaries and that he was concerned about it.

The police asked him to retreat and it seems that he did.

After that, there are several conflicting stories, but it seems that the two did get into a scuffle and that there were wounds on Zimmerman that could indicate that he was attacked.

Putting all of the stories aside, though, there was something about the circumstances as understood by the police on the night at the scene and later in the interrogation cell that made them believe that this was self defense kind of a shooting.

Do you profess to know more about what happened and possess a greater degree of knowledge of the details than did the police on the scene?

I am aware of more of the facts than you are, but in the end neither of us are in possession of all the evidence. I would argue with your wrong information, but in this case, and it has nothing to do with you, the media really fucked information up. That is the reason why I feel it is right to present it to the court to sort out. Of course things are going to be all over the place.

You are 'aware of more of the facts than you are'? Oh really? Please do tell how you have access to this vital, confidential information.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The facts of the case are not known by me and I suspect are not known by you.

What seems to be apparent is that Zimmerman was a self appointed neighborhood watch kind of a person.

He called the police to report that a person was in a neighborhood that had a history of burglaries and that he was concerned about it.

The police asked him to retreat and it seems that he did.

After that, there are several conflicting stories, but it seems that the two did get into a scuffle and that there were wounds on Zimmerman that could indicate that he was attacked.

Putting all of the stories aside, though, there was something about the circumstances as understood by the police on the night at the scene and later in the interrogation cell that made them believe that this was self defense kind of a shooting.

Do you profess to know more about what happened and possess a greater degree of knowledge of the details than did the police on the scene?

I am aware of more of the facts than you are, but in the end neither of us are in possession of all the evidence. I would argue with your wrong information, but in this case, and it has nothing to do with you, the media really fucked information up. That is the reason why I feel it is right to present it to the court to sort out. Of course things are going to be all over the place.

You are 'aware of more of the facts than you are'? Oh really? Please do tell how you have access to this vital, confidential information.

WOW I wonder how this person is aware of the facts more than anyone else? Unless they are part of the judicial system in charge of the case. If that part is true why is this person even talking about it? That's unethical and charges could be brought up against that person.

 

[code1211]

I do find all the people out there supporting zimmerman getting off without ever going to court to be very misguided. there is a legitimate time for the prosecution to not prosecute,. and having them there in the police station that evening to dismiss before they ever even got to court is a huge irregularity on the part of local law enforcement. That may be due to race, it may be due to his family or friends having some pull in the town, or it may just be a gigantic fuck up on their part. Zimmerman should have been charged.

If this is the case i could easily get into a fight with you in florida, shoot you dead, and then walk out the door having never faced much other than a few questions by the cops because it is legal to shoot you. If it is justified i should have to at least put that argument to a court. I have traffic tickets that got more court time than this, and those are such low end violations of the law that I actually would argue those in court to a cop. Even then once the cop has written a ticket I am going to court (If i chose not guilty) even if it is just to wait there for a while to have it dismissed.

Are you people really telling me that shooting a person dead should have less impact than a speeding ticket? is that the america you want to live in?

The facts of the case are not known by me and I suspect are not known by you.

What seems to be apparent is that Zimmerman was a self appointed neighborhood watch kind of a person.

He called the police to report that a person was in a neighborhood that had a history of burglaries and that he was concerned about it.

The police asked him to retreat and it seems that he did.

After that, there are several conflicting stories, but it seems that the two did get into a scuffle and that there were wounds on Zimmerman that could indicate that he was attacked.

Putting all of the stories aside, though, there was something about the circumstances as understood by the police on the night at the scene and later in the interrogation cell that made them believe that this was self defense kind of a shooting.

Do you profess to know more about what happened and possess a greater degree of knowledge of the details than did the police on the scene?

I am aware of more of the facts than you are, but in the end neither of us are in possession of all the evidence. I would argue with your wrong information, but in this case, and it has nothing to do with you, the media really fucked information up. That is the reason why I feel it is right to present it to the court to sort out. Of course things are going to be all over the place.

What is stated above that deviates from your understanding of what the facts are?

 

[American_Jihad]

"You people need to stop speculating, and the media needs to get back in the box and STFU."​

 

[NoNukes]

Who knows the facts?

 

[American_Jihad]

‘Trayvon Martin Day’ Indoctrination in D.C.

5/30/12 by Arnold Ahlert

In an event that illuminates the ongoing politicization of the nation’s public schools, Malcolm X Elementary school in Washington D.C. held an event called “Trayvon Martin Day” last Friday. “The children at Malcolm X know the name Trayvon Martin,” principal, J. Harrison Coleman told WJLA-TV. “They know the incident. They know it basically because of what’s in the news but because of what they experience every day.” The event was framed as part of an ongoing effort by the school called “Let’s Keep Our Children Safe.” But the slant of the agenda was clarified when Coleman announced that every adult who attended the seminar would receive an Arizona Iced Tea and each student would get a bag of Skittles, items Martin had purchased prior to his confrontation with George Zimmerman.

The day was framed as a “teachable moment” with respect to an anti-bullying campaign. Yet once again, Diane Woods, a special-education teacher and the school’s anti-bullying coordinator, framed the incident in a manner that aligns itself, either inadvertently or by design, with a version of the confrontation that remain in dispute. She believes the incident would have ended differently if Zimmerman had walked away. “A child lost his life,” Woods said. “It may not be a racial thing here…And we see so much anger and aggression here…It starts with hitting now, and it leads to more deaths when they get older. And that’s what we’re trying to avoid.”

Apparently the school is also trying to avoid dealing with the possibility that Zimmerman did indeed walk away and was pursued by Martin regardless of his retreat. On March 26, the Orlando Sentinel published an account of the story where Zimmerman claimed he was walking away when Martin approached him from behind, and the two men exchanged words. Martin then allegedly punched Zimmerman in the nose, knocking him to the ground, got on top of Zimmerman and began beating him. “That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been corroborated by witnesses, authorities say,” reported the Sentinel. “There have been no reports that a witness saw the initial punch Zimmerman told police about.”

---
Read More: ‘Trayvon Martin Day’ Indoctrination in D.C. | FrontPage Magazine

 

[American_Jihad]

Prosecutors want George Zimmerman bail revoked

6/1/12
By NBC's Jamie Novogrod

Florida prosecutors Friday asked a judge to revoke the bail for George Zimmerman, who is facing second-degree murder charges in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

Prosecutors accused Zimmerman, 28, of holding a second U.S. passport that he did not surrender to the court and alleged he misled the court regarding his finances when $150,000 bail was granted April 20.

The state attached a copy of the application for that passport to its motion. The state claims in its motion that Zimmerman obtained the second passport after filing a claim that his original passport had been lost or stolen.

Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara, conceded there was a second passport, saying, "It's not devious or inappropriate" to have a second passport if first one is lost or stolen. He said the second passport has never been stamped.

---

U.S. News - Prosecutors want George Zimmerman bail revoked