Free George Zimmerman

[TheGreatGatsby]

WorldWatcher for someone that says his mind is not made up; you sure do a lot of twisting against Zimmerman. After going through the first 5 "Not a facts" and realizing you don't actually know what the facts are per se then I don't know how you can be so arrogant. You don't come off as enlightened, you come off as a person with an agenda. I stopped reading after the first five so-called not a facts.

 

[JakeStarkey]

TGG certainly does not conduct himself as a worthy American adult male here.

Probably a one-hand commando typing away in his room in Mommy's basement.

You're still an emo deuche with nothing important to say; so you fall back on insults instead of joining the discussion. Sorta ironic considering the criticism you just leveled against me.

Says a white supremacist Storm Front doosh? Move along.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Pos rep to World Watcher who does the heavy lifting here. Good work.

 

[WorldWatcher]

WorldWatcher for someone that says his mind is not made up; you sure do a lot of twisting against Zimmerman. After going through the first 5 "Not a facts" and realizing you don't actually know what the facts are per se then I don't know how you can be so arrogant. You don't come off as enlightened, you come off as a person with an agenda. I stopped reading after the first five so-called not a facts.

No agenda, as a matter of fact I'm a gun owner and a member of our Neighborhood Watch. Given only the fact made available to the public if I was a jurist in the trial, then I would feel the state had not met the criteria of "beyond a reasonable doubt", and would today vote that Zimmerman was "Not Guilty". That of course could change depending on various things including:

• Autopsy report
• Actual witness statements
• Forensic evidence of the gunshot itself (distance, direction, etc.)
• Forensic evidence of phone records
• Comparison of Zimmerman early police statements to event that were found out later (for example does Zimmerman mention that Martin was on the phone for most of the time.)
• If Martin had a cell phone, could the police track Martins movement based on GPS logs on his phone?
• Etc.

Feel free to provide any supporting evidence as to the "facts" presented in the post I responded to and we can discuss. The very first thing I said in the post was that it would simply be an attempt to provide a counterpoint to what an individual claimed were the "facts" of the case and I showed that what the individual called "facts" they were simply his opinion, something very different.

As I said, if you would like to discuss verifiable "facts", not things simply that Zimmerman may or may not have claimed in his story, then that would be enjoyable.



>>>>

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

TGG certainly does not conduct himself as a worthy American adult male here.

Probably a one-hand commando typing away in his room in Mommy's basement.

You're still an emo deuche with nothing important to say; so you fall back on insults instead of joining the discussion. Sorta ironic considering the criticism you just leveled against me.

Says a white supremacist Storm Front doosh? Move along.

Yea, I never even heard of storm front til 5 minutes ago. Stop trolling dude.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You're still an emo deuche with nothing important to say; so you fall back on insults instead of joining the discussion. Sorta ironic considering the criticism you just leveled against me.

Says a white supremacist Storm Front doosh? Move along.

Yea, I never even heard of storm front til 5 minutes ago. Stop trolling dude.

That's a doosh of a lie. But if, for once, you, teen supremacist, are telling the truth, go look it up. You will be in pig doosh heaven. Go for it.,

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

WorldWatcher for someone that says his mind is not made up; you sure do a lot of twisting against Zimmerman. After going through the first 5 "Not a facts" and realizing you don't actually know what the facts are per se then I don't know how you can be so arrogant. You don't come off as enlightened, you come off as a person with an agenda. I stopped reading after the first five so-called not a facts.

No agenda, as a matter of fact I'm a gun owner and a member of our Neighborhood Watch. Given only the fact made available to the public if I was a jurist in the trial, then I would feel the state had not met the criteria of "beyond a reasonable doubt", and would today vote that Zimmerman was "Not Guilty".

Feel free to provide any supporting evidence as to the "facts" presented in the post I responded to and we can discuss. The very first thing I said in the post was that it would simply be an attempt to provide a counterpoint to what an individual claimed were the "facts" of the case and I showed that what the individual called "facts" they were simply his opinion, something very different.

As I said, if you would like to discuss verifiable "facts", not things simply that Zimmerman may or may not have claimed in his story, then that would be enjoyable.

>>>>

Yes, but a lot of your "not facts" were based on speculation or the idea that they are not necessarily proven or known facts. Perhaps I'm just being too critical. Seems like you should have chosen your words better. Perhaps said "not proven" or "not certain." Just b/c you don't know something doesn't make it a "not fact."

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Says a white supremacist Storm Front doosh? Move along.

Yea, I never even heard of storm front til 5 minutes ago. Stop trolling dude.

That's a doosh of a lie. But if, for once, you, teen supremacist, are telling the truth, go look it up. You will be in pig doosh heaven. Go for it.,

It's no a lie. I don't intentionally lie. If you knew me, you'd know that. Again, you're just an emo deuche looking for attention. What's wrong, did your mommy just ween you off of her teet and now you need attention? Get over yourself.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No name calling on this one, GG. You are acting normal in the your questions to BP. Does not your questions of BP apply to you as well?

Why don't we all take several steps away from the issue and try to get a clearer picture?

ps: however, when you act like an e-thug, don't be surprised to be treated like one.

 

[WorldWatcher]

WorldWatcher for someone that says his mind is not made up; you sure do a lot of twisting against Zimmerman. After going through the first 5 "Not a facts" and realizing you don't actually know what the facts are per se then I don't know how you can be so arrogant. You don't come off as enlightened, you come off as a person with an agenda. I stopped reading after the first five so-called not a facts.

No agenda, as a matter of fact I'm a gun owner and a member of our Neighborhood Watch. Given only the fact made available to the public if I was a jurist in the trial, then I would feel the state had not met the criteria of "beyond a reasonable doubt", and would today vote that Zimmerman was "Not Guilty".

Feel free to provide any supporting evidence as to the "facts" presented in the post I responded to and we can discuss. The very first thing I said in the post was that it would simply be an attempt to provide a counterpoint to what an individual claimed were the "facts" of the case and I showed that what the individual called "facts" they were simply his opinion, something very different.

As I said, if you would like to discuss verifiable "facts", not things simply that Zimmerman may or may not have claimed in his story, then that would be enjoyable.

>>>>

Yes, but a lot of your "not facts" were based on speculation or the idea that they are not necessarily proven or known facts. Perhaps I'm just being too critical. Seems like you should have chosen your words better. Perhaps said "not proven" or "not certain." Just b/c you don't know something doesn't make it a "not fact."

Most of the individuals "facts" were based on speculation which were not known or proven facts. It it is "not proven" or "not certain" then logic says it is "not a fact".

Let's take an example. In the first "Fact" the poster says that Zimmerman had a broken nose. Where is the evidence of that? The police report does not say that, it says that his nose was bleeding not that it was broken. Zimmerman received first aid on site from EMT's. Is there an EMT report that has been made available to public stating that his nose was broken? (I haven't seen one.) Zimmerman refused transport to the hospital for his injuries, so there was no medical examination no medical evaluation is part of the record at this time.

To state Zimmerman's nose was broken we would need a medical evaluation showing it was broken. Without confirmation we could have his nose broken or it was simply a bloody nose. We know his nose was bleeding, that is a fact. We don't know is nose was broken (at this point) so it is not a fact it is speculation.


Do you have access to medical reports that his nose was broken?


>>>>

 

[KissMy]

Just to provide a counterpoint to some of these "facts". And no my mind is not made up either way as the public does not have access to all the information that has been developed.

Interesting post under the article linked to in the OP.
8 facts that support Zimmerman's claim of lawful self defense:

Fact 1:
Zimmerman had a broken nose supporting his claim that Trayvon punched him in the face.

That is not a fact. The police report simply says that Zimmerman's nose was bleeding, he received first aid by SFD EMT's. My understanding is he declined to go to the hospital for his injuries and so was taken directly to the police station.

Fact 2:

Zimmerman had wet grass stains on the back of his jacket supporting his claim that Trayvon knocked him on his back.

Not a fact.

The only fact that shows is that Zimmerman and Martin ended up on the ground, it does nothing to support who initiated hostilities.

These QUOTES should not have my name on them. Also your responses are addressed directly to me. I was only quoting a post in the OP article. All I said was this is interesting. The poster seemed to have facts I never saw before.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Just to provide a counterpoint to some of these "facts". And no my mind is not made up either way as the public does not have access to all the information that has been developed.

These QUOTES should not have my name on them. Also your responses are addressed directly to me. I was only quoting a post in the OP article. All I said was this is interesting. The poster seemed to have facts I never saw before.

My apologies. Mistake in segmenting the quotes.

I've gone back and fixed the post in question.


>>>>

 

[BDBoop]

Pos rep to World Watcher who does the heavy lifting here. Good work.

Seconded.

 

[BDBoop]

Says a white supremacist Storm Front doosh? Move along.

Yea, I never even heard of storm front til 5 minutes ago. Stop trolling dude.

That's a doosh of a lie. But if, for once, you, teen supremacist, are telling the truth, go look it up. You will be in pig doosh heaven. Go for it.,

Oh, god; no doubt.

 

[Rinata]

Exactly.

I'm not quite sure why the racists are so vested in there not being a trial.

Although not everyone that didn't think there should be a trial is racist. The important thing is that the people responsible with making the decision on a trial or not, made the decision, perhaps based on information we don't know yet.

Our justice system is not perfect, but it's the best in the world. No need to look at it with cynisim now, and there wasn't a need before he was arrested. Let's trust that he gets a fair trial, and ultimately hope for justice.

If someone violently attacked you and you lawfully used lethal force to protect yourself and then you were tried, you'd be cynical. It doesn't even matter if Zimmerman is declared not guilty, the legal system is already abusing him at this point.

BTW, despite media twisting, they have the eye witness that states it was Zimmerman on the ground yelling for help. This case is not even gray like people are pretending.

What are you blabbering about?? There is no evidence that George Zimmerman was, "violently", attacked. And it seems to me that Zimmerman has been handled with kid gloves. Nobody is abusing him. And the media has twisted nothing. Where is this eye witness??? It seems as though YOU are the one that is twisting the facts.

All people wanted was for George Zimmerman to be held accountable in a court of law. And that is going to happen. Why is that such a problem for you??

 

[Rinata]

That's what the defense has to do, and he's not necisarily the victim.

but an anonymous racist like TGG isn't the defense attorney. plus, you just can't throw mud at a victim b/c there is prejudice that would attach which outweighs the probative value. they would be allowed to talk only about what occurred THEN...

I doubt they'll be able to bring up the nonsense about him having tats and giving the finger to the camera on twitter...

neither of those things justifies someone being hunted down.

Racist? Give me a break. That's a load of junk. But you're worse than a racist. You're willing to crucify an innocent man b/c you have some sort of political agenda.

So you have already decided that GZ is an innocent man??? Oh, please. You're a joke.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Yea, I never even heard of storm front til 5 minutes ago. Stop trolling dude.

That's a doosh of a lie. But if, for once, you, teen supremacist, are telling the truth, go look it up. You will be in pig doosh heaven. Go for it.,

Oh, god; no doubt.

Geez you guys are bitter. I have no reason to lie. I know you'll call me a racist either way.

Also, I've never ever even mentioned this storm front or any other white oriented site (you guys did).

You love to pretend that anyone who doesn't see the world through your eyes is some sort of villain.

It's pretty vain to call someone a liar without a shred of proof.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I really believe he was arrested just to appease the people that have been screaming for his arrest...whether they had real evidence or not.

They had WEEKS to make this decision. I may be wrong, but i think they had to come up with something that the protestors would be satisfied with. 2nd Degree Murder sounds good...but i have a feeling that he will probably walk away with a very short sentence, or none at all, once the jury hears all the evidence. There are many out there that will not accept a not guilty verdict, no matter what the evidence is. In fact i believe there are many that will protest (or riot) anything less than a 10 yr sentence, no matter if the evidence happens to prove that Zimmerman is telling the truth.

I don't see any evidence that exonerates Zimmerman.

If Trayvon attacked him, it was because he followed him after being told not to by a 911 operator. In short, his negligence in getting into that situation negates any mitigation during the situation.

Kind of like a drunk driver doesn't get off because he was drunk.

Do I think there were politics involved here? Absolutely. But I think that a law that allows a loose cannon like Zimmerman to walk around packing a 9MM and shoot a kid in the street is pure insanity.

What statute or law did Zimmerman violate? I have asked you this several times

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

No agenda, as a matter of fact I'm a gun owner and a member of our Neighborhood Watch. Given only the fact made available to the public if I was a jurist in the trial, then I would feel the state had not met the criteria of "beyond a reasonable doubt", and would today vote that Zimmerman was "Not Guilty".

Feel free to provide any supporting evidence as to the "facts" presented in the post I responded to and we can discuss. The very first thing I said in the post was that it would simply be an attempt to provide a counterpoint to what an individual claimed were the "facts" of the case and I showed that what the individual called "facts" they were simply his opinion, something very different.

As I said, if you would like to discuss verifiable "facts", not things simply that Zimmerman may or may not have claimed in his story, then that would be enjoyable.

>>>>

Yes, but a lot of your "not facts" were based on speculation or the idea that they are not necessarily proven or known facts. Perhaps I'm just being too critical. Seems like you should have chosen your words better. Perhaps said "not proven" or "not certain." Just b/c you don't know something doesn't make it a "not fact."

Most of the individuals "facts" were based on speculation which were not known or proven facts. It it is "not proven" or "not certain" then logic says it is "not a fact".

Let's take an example. In the first "Fact" the poster says that Zimmerman had a broken nose. Where is the evidence of that? The police report does not say that, it says that his nose was bleeding not that it was broken. Zimmerman received first aid on site from EMT's. Is there an EMT report that has been made available to public stating that his nose was broken? (I haven't seen one.) Zimmerman refused transport to the hospital for his injuries, so there was no medical examination no medical evaluation is part of the record at this time.

To state Zimmerman's nose was broken we would need a medical evaluation showing it was broken. Without confirmation we could have his nose broken or it was simply a bloody nose. We know his nose was bleeding, that is a fact. We don't know is nose was broken (at this point) so it is not a fact it is speculation.


Do you have access to medical reports that his nose was broken?


>>>>

Technically, if something is not proven then it is not a fact. Still, "not a fact" creates the connotation that it is also unproven or untrue. I would not state "not a fact" about something that could still be factually shown. You would have been better off going with truer terms like "uncertain" or "unknown" in many cases. Otherwise, it does make you appear to have an agenda.

Let's take an example. In the first "Fact" the poster says that Zimmerman had a broken nose. Where is the evidence of that? The police report does not say that, it says that his nose was bleeding not that it was broken. Zimmerman received first aid on site from EMT's. Is there an EMT report that has been made available to public stating that his nose was broken?

How often do EMT's diagnose broken noses? I imagine a good percentage of the time. But also a good percentage of the time, they do not. It is often not known whether a nose is broken w/o the benefit of x-ray.

You stated that it's not a fact that his nose was broken. You have no idea for sure whether that is a fact or not though.

--

Your first example is probably uh whatever though. Probably wasn't enough for me to say anything. But go to your second example.

You refute that Zimmerman was knocked on his back. Yes, we don't know if that is true based on a witness account. But for all we know it is true. To call that "not a fact" is very misleading.

On fact 3 regarding Zimmerman's cuts to his head; you again base "not a fact" on total speculation about the scuffle. And you do it while ignoring the likelihood that the cuts were from being attacked (as that is what the eye witness account was). Again, this type of refutation shows that you absolutely appear to have an agenda/opinion despite claims to the contrary.

Your so called "not a fact four" was especially egregious. You disregarded an eye witness in favor of a so-called expert's analysis claiming that was TM calling for help. And the so-called expert was not even that of the prosecution. It was a media source. You disregarded an actual fact based on speculation. Good job bud. I'll stop there. That one really did it. That one really showed your agenda. There's just no doubt. You can't claim impartiality while disregarding facts and claiming non facts as facts.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The question will turn on whether Zimmerman had abandoned the pursuit when he returned to his car and whether it was Zimmerman then followed by Martin.

Zimmerman didn't return to his truck. That was parked on Twin Tree's, the event took place behind the building. For Zimmerman to have returned to his truck and been ambushed by Martin, then Martin would have had to drag Zimmerman back behind the building were the fight progressed and then Zimmerman shot Martin.

Makes no sense.


>>>>

Since two people here think you have carried the work as it was posted let's see what you have got.

Zimmerman WAS returning back to his truck that he left on twin tree, too meet with the police when they arrived, It was when he turned around to go back to his truck there was a sidewalk that cut between the two housing complexes that's where Trayvon jumped Zimmerman and they rolled to the final point in front of the rear portion of Johns home.. Now why would he shoot anyone unless he was attacked?