Free George Zimmerman

[JakeStarkey]

I gets your drift - at that tender age - they don't know how to use their arms, legs and teeth to inflict damage. .

Not against a gun, no.

Zimmerman's gun was CONCEALED . .

Assumption on your part.

 

[Peach]

Not against a gun, no.

Zimmerman's gun was CONCEALED . .

Assumption on your part.

It wasn't CONCEALED when he shot Martin, by his own admission.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Liar.

And you have no way of knowing he wasn't committing a crime.

And the use of kid is disengenuous. His own mother called him a young man...

Sorry, at my age, a 17 year old is a kid. And, nope, he wasn't committing a crime. He was buying Skittles.

What's with the weird underlinging shit? That's kind of obsessive.

Joe you spread lies all over this board. Trayvon attacked George. If you're going to sanitize your arguments then there's no point dealing with you.

If he did why would he? Did GZ do something to provoke TM? Was TM scared for his life considering a strange man was following him? Did TM think that GZ was some sort of freak pedophile stalking him?
All the facts aren't there for us to know an make a sound conclusion yet, but from what I'm gathering GZ should have stayed put when advised to by police, and it looks like GZ by his own actions provoked this situation and it doesn't look good for him.
The SP is nailing him with a charge that she thinks can stick...why?
Because of GZ actions that day I'm thinking.
Would the SP stick her neck out with such a charge, even if like some of you say is for political reasons or pressure, if she didn't have some evidence to back her claims up?
GZ should have stayed put in his vehicle and waited for the police, and perhaps the "struggle" would not have happened.
TM was not in the act of breaking any law and only posed a "threat" to GZ because GZ was looking for a threatening situation as an excuse.
Arresting and charging his dumbass should serve as a deterrent to others that think they can do the same and then try to hide behind a law meant to protect honest law abiding citizens from real criminals and asswipes like GZ.

 

[JakeStarkey]

My own guess? GZ flashed his gun at TM, and in fear for his life TM attacked GZ and went for the gun.

That is far more sensible than anything The Great Gatsby has suggested.

 

[Peach]

My own guess? GZ flashed his gun at TM, and in fear for his life TM attacked GZ and went for the gun.

That is far more sensible than anything The Great Gatsby has suggested.

Or maybe Martin looked like he was coming at Zimmerman & Zimmerman SHOT.

 

[BDBoop]

It felt to me like Mr. Martin was screaming for much longer than what you're saying, but otherwise it makes sense.

 

[Contumacious]

Do tell. You're a spiffy eye witness, you know that.

Well, it is up to the DA to prove otherwise.

Mr Zimmerman does NOT have to prove his innocence.

.

 

[koshergrl]

It felt to me like Mr. Martin was screaming for much longer than what you're saying, but otherwise it makes sense.

Oh, you were there? Quick, complete an affidavit and get it to the prosecutor!

 

[koshergrl]

My own guess? GZ flashed his gun at TM, and in fear for his life TM attacked GZ and went for the gun.

That is far more sensible than anything The Great Gatsby has suggested.

Nobody attacks anyone for flashing a gun.

When you see someone flash a gun you head out the other direction.

However, if you are in close contact with somebody and you notice they are packing, you're going to try to grab it because you know it might get used against you.

Which is, of course, what Zimmerman said happened.

Typically, people don't chase down and jump on people they know have guns. Just saying.

 

[koshergrl]

I mean seriously.

How many people have you heard say "he flashed a gun so I threw myself on top of him and tried to grab it, because I thought that might be the best way to avoid getting shot."

It doesn't happen because it's IDIOTIC.

 

[Peach]

I mean seriously.

How many people have you heard say "he flashed a gun so I threw myself on top of him and tried to grab it, because I thought that might be the best way to avoid getting shot."

It doesn't happen because it's IDIOTIC.

So it may come down to my big question; how far away from each other were the two when the shot was fired?

 

[JakeStarkey]

My own guess? GZ flashed his gun at TM, and in fear for his life TM attacked GZ and went for the gun. That is far more sensible than anything The Great Gatsby has suggested.

Nobody attacks anyone for flashing a gun. When you see someone flash a gun you head out the other direction. However, if you are in close contact with somebody and you notice they are packing, you're going to try to grab it because you know it might get used against you. Which is, of course, what Zimmerman said happened. Typically, people don't chase down and jump on people they know have guns. Just saying.

I can't argue with that, but the point is that when GZ shot TM logic or common sense was out the window. Something badly went wrong.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I mean seriously.

How many people have you heard say "he flashed a gun so I threw myself on top of him and tried to grab it, because I thought that might be the best way to avoid getting shot."

It doesn't happen because it's IDIOTIC.

It never happens?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

You're right plasmaball. I wouldn't call Trayvon a man. He was too much of a thug and a coward to be called that.

 

[BDBoop]

I thought you were off brooding somewhere, TGG. Shoo.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I thought you were off brooding somewhere, TGG. Shoo.

Am i your little broody broo You're my little shoody shoo

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[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.

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.

Fact 3:
Zimmerman had open cuts on the back of his head supporting his claim that Trayvon smashed the back of his head repeatedly on the ground.

Not a fact.

It only shows that Zimmerman was knocked to the ground. He could have hit his head when he fell. Martin could have grabbed his head and impacted it to the ground OR Zimmerman could have attacked Martin, Martin gets a shot in to the face knocking Zimmerman to the ground and Zimmerman hits his head.

Fact 4:
A black resident of the community testified that the man lying on the
ground being hit [and screaming for help] was wearing a red jacket. Zimmerman was
the person wearing the red jacket.

Not a fact (at this point).

Another witness says that it was Zimmerman that was on top and it was Martin calling for help.

Screams on 911 call not George Zimmerman, forensic voice experts say - Crimesider - CBS News

Fact 5:
When the lead detective played the recorded screams back to Trayvon's
father, the father emphatically stated that the person screaming was not
his son. (Note: Later the father denied telling the detective that. But why would the detective have lied?)

Can't comment because I'm not aware of what you speak.

Fact 6:
Zimmerman was interrogated for five hours without legal
representation. The next day the investigators went back to the housing
complex with Zimmerman and Zimmerman reenacted in detail the events of
the previous evening. Neither during 5 hour police interrogation, or the
next day reenactment of the event, did Zimmerman contradict his
original testimony.

1. Being interrogate by police without legal counsel is not wrong, if the individual, after being read his rights, voluntarily decides to be interrogated.

2. Evidence that conflicts with Zimmerman's statement may not have be developed until after the next morning.

Fact 7:
[Prior to the shooting]
Zimmerman called the police and gave them the address where they should
meet him. Needless to say, if Zimmerman was planning to shoot Trayvon
it would have been absurd for him to call the police prior to the shooting.

OPINION: Personally I'm doubtful that Zimmerman was planning on killing anyone, I think the event escalated and Zimmerman reacted being pumped full of adrenalin.

Fact 8:
Though Zimmerman at one time weighed 250 pounds, at the time of the shooting
he weighed only 170 pounds. His height was five foot eight inches. According
to police reports,Trayvon was 160 pounds and 6 foot in height. (His parents say he was 6 foot 3 inches in height.)

Not a fact.

My understanding is that Zimmerman weighed 185 pounds when he was in processed after being arrested. His lawyers said he lost weight from the time of the shooting to the time of the arrest approximately 6-weeks later due to stress.

If he's lost weight since the shooting than he could not have weighed 170 lbs at the time of the shooting.

George Zimmerman is alone, "a little bit over the edge," says former lawyers - Crimesider - CBS News

Conclusion:

Zimmerman found himself confronted by a 6 foot male (perhaps 6'3") weighing 160 pounds. Trayvon was not the small child that the media deceitfully attempts to portray him.

Given the latter 8 facts, they was no probable cause to arrest Zimmerman.
However, there was probable cause to arrest Trayvon for first degree
assault, if he had survived the shooting.

Given that most of the "facts" listed above are not "facts" the claim that there was no probable cause based on those "facts" is suspect.

Issue 1:

If it is shown that Trayvon had massive gun powder residue deposited on his body, that will prove that Zimmerman fired his weapon at less than one foot distance from Trayvon.

Correct.

However if the GSR and not "massive" then that could indicate that Zimmerman drew and fired from a distance. That would be bad for him as it would likely conflict with his statements to law enforcement.

Issue 2:

If it is shown that the bullet's trajectory was vertical, rather than horizontal, that would demonstrate that Zimmerman was on the ground when he shot Trayvon.

Assuming you mean in reference to the ground plan, agreed.

The latter two issues can be readily determined (if they haven't been determined already).

By this they have.

A non-arguable reality:

Zimmerman had a broken nose and cuts on the back of his head. These injuries were obviously incurred prior to shooting Trayvon. Therefore, we know Trayvon physically assaulted Zimmerman.

Actually that is very arguable because no information has been released to the public as to the status of Zimmerman's nose. Police reports only list it as bleeding, not broken and Zimmerman did not go to the hospital for medical evaluation. The injury to the back of the head could easily result from falling (either from a punch or push) backwards.

Zimmerman's injuries DO NOTHING to show who assaulted whom, only who was losing the physical fight once it started.

Given Zimmerman's wounds, and the wet grass stains on the back of his jacket, Trayvon's physical assault on Zimmerman is not up for dispute.

Not true, it is very up for dispute if you the evidence is examined without assumptions. At this point with the information available to the public Zimmerman could have initiated hostilities and Martin as the defender under Florida's "Stand Your Ground Law" or Martin could have initiated hostilities and Zimmerman as the defender under Florida's "Stand Your Ground Law".

The central question is:

Did Trayvon assault Zimmerman in self defense?

Actually the central question is who assaulted whom, with the evidence available to the public, at this point, it could have been either.

Answer:
If Trayvon [doubled back] and punched Zimmerman in the nose, got on top of him, and slammed his head repeatedly into the ground, Trayvon was guilty of criminal assault.

True.

However if Zimmerman continued to follow Martin and confronted and attacked Martin, the Martin was justified in "Standing His Ground" under FL because he was attacked. Even though Martin was getting the better of the fight, Zimmerman would have been guilty of criminal assault.

Proof that Trayvon did in fact double back and physically assault Zimmerman:

Zimmerman told the police dispatcher that Trayvon had sprinted away from him. Shortly thereafter, Zimmerman walked a [short distance] from his car to get the exact street address to give to the police dispatcher.

I see you use the characterization of "sprinted" for Martin and "walked a [short distance]" for Zimmerman intending to provoke an emotional bias for Zimmerman and against Martin.

The fact is we have no indication as to the speed that Martin departed the initial location from. All we have is Zimmerman's statement that he was "running". That could be Martin (who by this time was talking on his own phone, as per verifiable phone records), could have been he was walking, walking quickly, lopping, running, or sprinting and that Zimmerman was describing any attempt to depart as "running".

There is no indication how far Zimmerman travelled away from his truck. We know it was parked on Twin Trees and that Zimmerman had travelled all the away to then end of the street with the right hand turn and proceeded to the back of the building.

If Trayvon had not doubled back, the fight would have occurred at a location far removed from where it occurred.

There is no indication that Martin doubled back at any time and there is no evidence tht Zimmerman didn't continue pursuit after told not do so by the Dispatcher. It possible that Martin took the route to the left of the building at the left of Twin Trees and Zimmerman went to the right, through the building cut through and intercepted Martin at the scene where the event occurred.

All the documented facts support Zimmerman's claim that Trayvon unlawfully assaulted him with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury.

Under such circumstances, the application of deadly force is legally justified.

No they don't, far from it.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

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.


>>>>