[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Smith: It's Damned Hard To Be Proud Of America

Lefties losing it: Rita Panahi slams ‘deranged rant’ calling for assassination of Trump

Stalin, The Red Terror | Full Documentary

Russia, Soviet Union and The Cold War: Stalin's Legacy | Russia's Wars Ep.2 | Documentary

Battle and Liberation: The End of World War II | Countdown to Surrender – The Last 100 Days | Ep. 4

Ethereum ETFs In 'Window-Dressing' Stage, Approval Within Weeks; Galaxy

Americans Are More Likely To Go To War With The Government Than Submit To The Draft

Rudy Giuliani has just been disbarred in New York

Israeli Generals Want Truce in Gaza,

Joe Biden's felon son Hunter is joining White House meetings

The only Democrat who could beat Trump

Ukraine is too CORRUPT to join NATO, US says, in major blow to Zelensky and boost for Putin

CNN Erin Burnett Admits Joe Biden knew the Debate questions..

Affirmative Action Suit Details How Law School Blackballed Accomplished White Men, Opted For Unqualified Black Women

Russia warns Israel over Ukraine missiles

Yemeni Houthis Vow USS Theodore Roosevelt 'Primary Target' Once it Enters Red Sea

3 Minutes Ago: Jim Rickards Shared Horrible WARNING

Horse is back at library

Crossdressing Luggage Snatcher and Ex-Biden Official Sam Brinton Gets Sweetheart Plea Deal

Music

The Ones That Didn't Make It Back Home [featuring Pacman @ 0:49 - 0:57 in his natural habitat]

Let’s Talk About Grief | Death Anniversary

Democrats Suddenly Change Slogan To 'Orange Man Good'

America in SHOCK as New Footage of Jill Biden's 'ELDER ABUSE' Emerges | Dems FURIOUS: 'Jill is EVIL'

Executions, reprisals and counter-executions - SS Polizei Regiment 19 versus the French Resistance

Paratrooper kills german soldier and returns wedding photos to his family after 68 years

AMeRiKaN GULaG...

'Christian Warrior Training' explodes as churches put faith in guns

Major insurer gives brutal ultimatum to entire state: Let us put up prices by 50 percent or we will leave

Biden Admin Issues Order Blocking Haitian Illegal Immigrants From Deportation


National News
See other National News Articles

Title: Zimmerman juror from Chicago speaks out: He 'got away with murder'
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ ... icago-20130725,0,4361149.story
Published: Jul 25, 2013
Author: staff
Post Date: 2013-07-25 15:38:33 by Horse
Keywords: None
Views: 3051
Comments: 284

A juror in the George Zimmerman trial who had recently moved to Florida from Chicago said today that Zimmerman "got away with murder" for killing Trayvon Martin and feels she owes an apology to Martin's parents.

"You can't put the man in jail even though in our hearts we felt he was guilty," the woman, identified only as Juror B29 during the trial, told ABC's "Good Morning America. "We had to grab our hearts and put it aside and look at the evidence."

She said the evidence, under Florida law, did not prove murder.

The court has sealed the jurors' identities. While she allowed her face to be shown during the interview, she used only a first name of Maddy.

The woman is a nursing assistant and mother of eight children. She was living in Chicago when Martin was killed and was selected as a juror five months after moving to Seminole County, Fla. She is 36 and Puerto Rican, the only minority among the five women on the jury. Zimmerman, 29, is Hispanic and Martin, 17, was black.

But Maddy insisted that the case was never about race, at least to her. "George Zimmerman got away with murder, but you can't get away from God. And at the end of the day, he's going to have a lot of questions and answers he has to deal with," Maddy told the show.

When the jury began deliberations, Maddy said she favored convicting Zimmerman of second-degree murder, which could have put him in prison for the rest of his life. The jury was also allowed to consider manslaughter, a lesser charge.

"I was the juror that was going to give them the hung jury. I fought to the end," she said.

But on the second day of deliberations, Maddy said she realized there wasn't enough proof to convict Zimmerman of murder or manslaughter under Florida law. Zimmerman admitted he shot and killed Martin on Feb. 26, 2012, but maintained he fired in self-defense.

"That's where I felt confused, where if a person kills someone, then you get charged for it," Maddy said. "But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can't say he's guilty."

The juror said she has had trouble adjusting to life after the verdict, and has wrestled with whether she made the right decision. "I felt like I let a lot of people down, and I'm thinking to myself, 'Did I go the right way? Did I go the wrong way?'" she said.

"As much as we were trying to find this man guilty. . .they give you a booklet that basically tells you the truth. And the truth is that there was nothing that we could do about it," she said. "I feel the verdict was already told."

She said she believes she owes Trayvon Martin's parents an apology because she feels "like I let them down."

"It's hard for me to sleep, it's hard for me to eat because I feel I was forcefully included in Trayvon Martin's death. And as I carry him on my back, I'm hurting as much Trayvon's Martin's mother because there's no way that any mother should feel that pain," she said.

Maddy is the second juror to speak in a televised interview, and the first to show her face.

Juror B37, whose face and body were hidden, appeared last week on Anderson Cooper's CNN show, and said she believes Zimmerman's "heart was in the right place" when he became suspicious of Martin and that the teenager probably threw the first punch.

Since then, four other jurors distanced themselves from B37's remarks and released a statement saying B37's opinions were "not in any way representative" of their own.


Poster Comment:

Zimmerman is not white. He could not be convicted because there was no evidence. But I wonder why they had an all woman jury. Maybe they were looking for people like this woman.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 224.

#11. To: Horse (#0)

Juror B37, whose face and body were hidden, appeared last week on Anderson Cooper's CNN show, and said she believes Zimmerman's "heart was in the right place" when he became suspicious of Martin and that the teenager probably threw the first punch.

Since then, four other jurors distanced themselves from B37's remarks and released a statement saying B37's opinions were "not in any way representative" of their own.

I guess George Zimmerman should have time his beat-down to shoot Saint Trayvon during the last second he was conscious and then passed out, that's the only way he could have got any sympathy from the rabble-rousers who want his head served on a platter.

X-15  posted on  2013-07-25   22:06:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: X-15 (#11)

I guess George Zimmerman should have time his beat-down to shoot Saint Trayvon during the last second he was conscious and then passed out, that's the only way he could have got any sympathy from the rabble-rousers who want his head served on a platter.

Seems to me that the juror who talked all that stupid $#it, about how he "got away with murder" really doesn't understand that people kill (not murder) other people when it's a matter of self defense every day. Trayvon Martin would have killed Zimmerman if Zimmerman hadn't killed him. I don't blame Zimmerman one iota for defending himself.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2013-07-25   22:26:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: James Deffenbach (#12)

Now you know why some cops carry a "throw-down": they don't want ANY doubts when they have to shoot somebody under less-than-ideal circumstances. Zimmerman was right in defending himself, but he had no way of knowing that it would blow up in his face like it did.

X-15  posted on  2013-07-25   22:33:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: X-15 (#13)

I imagine that he has wished every day since then that he had not gotten out of his truck. That being said, he did nothing illegal. Trayvon sucker punched him and from the looks of things was trying to injure him very seriously and, in my opinion, would not care if he had killed him.

I can't even imagine how someone as double minded as this juror seems to be ever makes it through the day.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2013-07-25   22:52:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: James Deffenbach (#14)

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Trayvon sucker punched anyone. You are blindly accepting Zimmerman's version of how the fight started as an article of faith.

strepsiptera  posted on  2013-07-25   23:30:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: strepsiptera (#15)

Actually there is evidence, circumstantial, but evidence. The one good eyewitness gave a description that best fit St. Trayvon as being on top of Zimmerman beating his head into the concrete. The wounds, the back of his skull, broken nose, and the witness testimony clearly indicate that Zimmerman was telling the truth. The Jury, which appears to have been predisposed to convict, acquitted him, and are now running for cover because of all of the hatreds inflamed by the stilted, biased, Perception Management Press coverage. Combined of course with the blather emanating from the orifice of the Usurper-In-Chief who clearly demonstrated his "objectivity" or lack thereof. It has been clear from almost the beginning that this regrettable incident was the result of poor judgement, and racial animosity, on the part of St. Trayvon the immaculate.

Original_Intent  posted on  2013-07-25   23:39:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Original_Intent (#18)

There is circumstantial evidence that based on very minor cuts to the back of the head of Zimmerman, thatTrayvon was on top for at least some part of the fight. There is no proof, other than taking Zimmerman's word for it that anyone was having their head bashed in. The injuries are not severe enough to prove that. Zimmerman's story makes it sound like he was in imminent danger of skull fracture. There is simply no proof for that.

strepsiptera  posted on  2013-07-25   23:59:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: strepsiptera (#24)

here is circumstantial evidence that based on very minor cuts to the back of the head of Zimmerman, ...

There is nothing "circumstantial" about it. The photographs taken clearly show that Zimmerman was bleeding from the back of his head. As well you ignore the fact that his nose was also broken. Both of those are consistent with BOTH Zimmerman's account and that of the one eyewitness close enough to observe what was going on. The eyewitness's account most clearly indicts St. Trayvon as being on top while he beat the shit out of Zimmerman.

It seems to me that you are trying to excuse St. Trayvon's behavior in any way you can by trying to assert Zimmerman as having been guilty of aggressive behavior toward Trayvon. And again you would like to rearrange the stipulated, witnessed facts, that Zimmerman was not injured and that it was he, not Trayvon, that was on top DESPITE the eyewitness testimony which indicates that St. Trayvon was on top.

A man who is fighting for his life against an aggressor threatening to kill him and who is beating his head into the ground at the time can be reasonably be expected to be in fear for his life.

As well St. Trayvon was carrying on him 2 of the 3 ingredients required for making the street drug lean. One of the side effects observed of lean users is their inclination toward irrational rages.

Zimmerman's story makes it sound like he was in imminent danger of skull fracture. There is simply no proof for that.

So, are you arguing that the photograph showing the cuts and bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head are false, or that a man on the receiving end of the kind of force necessary to create them, while having his nose broken, cannot have a reasonable fear for the safety of his life?

Original_Intent  posted on  2013-07-26   0:35:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Original_Intent (#32)

Stalking someone with a gun is aggressive behavior.

Trayvon doesn't need to be injured for Zimmerman to be guilty of assault. If Zimmerman grabbed Trayvon then Zimmerman would be guilty of assault and Trayvon's punch would be self defense.

Robitussin is the only one of those ingredients which is even a drug. The other two things do nothing. A drug without the active ingredient is not a drug.

strepsiptera  posted on  2013-07-26   1:03:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: strepsiptera (#37)

Stalking someone with a gun is aggressive behavior.

And your proof that Zimmerman was stalking pooooooooor Trayvon, is? Zimmerman was the local Neighborhood Watch Captain in a mixed neighborhood that had been subject to multiple break ins and burglaries over the preceding months. He had already, in earlier incidents, shown a willingness to help and defend neighbors some of which were elderly and black. In all cases where the criminals conducting the break-ins and burglaries were observed they were black youths. Trayvon, from Zimmerman's 911 call, WAS behaving suspiciously; peering into unlit houses and appearing to be casing the neighborhood. That is consistent with prior events, and Trayvon, if not for political correctness, should have already been reported to the police as a locker search at school yielded stolen property and what was described as a burglary tool. Oh, and the Jury was not allowed to be told that, or the multiple times Trayvon had been ejected from school for his violent behavior, but they nevertheless did not see enough evidence to convict. Even without knowing Trayvon's criminal history.

"Robitussin is the only one of those ingredients which is even a drug. The other two things do nothing. A drug without the active ingredient is not a drug. "

You seem addicted to strawman arguments. Your argument is logically equivalent to saying that finding someone with Hydrosulfuric acid and Glycerin does not mean that they had no intention of acquiring some nice Nitric Acid in order to finish making a batch of Nitroglycerin.

No, having 2 of the 3 ingredients for making a drug is not clear proof of intent. However, again if you go and look at Trayvon's online postings he clearly knew what the ingredients required were, had used it in the past (remember the autopsy found liver damage i.e., deposits not normally found on the liver of a healthy clean and sober 17 year old), and his postings show at least one attempt to "score" some codeine online.

Again you are clutching at straws and trying to absolve pooooooooor St. Trayvon who by all records and accounts was a violent little thug who used drugs.

Sorry, but all you can do at this point is try to obfuscate and evade. Unfortunately, all modesty aside, I am too schooled in logic to fall prey to such tactics.

Original_Intent  posted on  2013-07-26   1:24:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Original_Intent (#39)

In all cases where the criminals conducting the break-ins and burglaries were observed they were black youths.

Being the same race as someone who committed a crime does not make you a criminal. Zimmerman jumped to the conclusion that Trayvon was a criminal based primarily on his race. That is why race is an issue in this case. Zimmerman sounds paranoid and delusional on the 911 tape. There is no evidence whatsoever that Trayvon was doing anything criminal or even suspicious on the night that he was killed.

strepsiptera  posted on  2013-07-26   1:45:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: strepsiptera (#42)

Being the same race as someone who committed a crime does not make you a criminal.

No it does not, but when you are in a neighborhood at night "casing" houses it is reasonable, and prudent, to ask if that suspicious person is up to no good. Zimmerman did not try to arrest him, he merely kept tabs on him while he called 911. There is nothing aggressive in that and given the history of the neighborhood, and Trayvon's behavior, it was not unreasonable to question what he was doing.

Again you can't have "your own" "facts". What we can observe and draw from conclusions from is what is in evidence.

Zimmerman was the Neighborhood Watch Captain and so it was entirely reasonable for him to keep tabs on suspicious behavior. I've been on the Neighborhood Watch and I have had a couple of incidents where I did have to call 911. So, was my keeping a watch on the neighborhood an aggressively criminal offense? Did my keeping watch entitle the people I was keeping tabs on to attack me?

Just remember: "When seconds count the Police are only minutes away."

And again Zimmerman did not draw a conclusion that Trayvon was behaving suspiciously because of his race, it was because he was behaving suspiciously. Remember the 911 tape? Zimmerman was not even sure of the race of the person he was following until the 911 Operator asked him and he looked. Even then he was not sure - his answer to the question was, "I think he's black." That is also the reason for Zimmerman's defamation lawsuit as ABC Snooze edited the tape and cut out all of the intervening words thus creating a false impression in their reporting.

Gee, that sure sounds like Klan material to me. /sarcasm

There is no evidence whatsoever that Trayvon was doing anything criminal or even suspicious on the night that he was killed.

Oh, really? Pray do tell? Given that Zimmerman called 911 and the description of suspicious behavior is on the tape perhaps you can pull out your crystal ball and decipher it for us.

And again it was SUSPICIOUS BEHAVIOR that, from the 911 tape, caught Zimmerman's eye, not the color of Trayvon's hide which he was not sure of till the 911 Operator asked him to look.

Again, you are welcome to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

Original_Intent  posted on  2013-07-26   2:13:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#74. To: Original_Intent (#44)

The only thing Trayvon was doing is walking through the neighborhood, which Zimmerman chose to subjectively interpret as suspicious behavior based on his own paranoia. Show me hard objective evidence that Trayvon was doing anything suspicious prior to Zimmerman pursuing him. Zimmerman was not a neutral person trying to investigate the situation. He is extremely belligerent and hostile on the 911 tape.

strepsiptera  posted on  2013-07-26   11:49:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#79. To: strepsiptera (#74)

The only thing Trayvon was doing is walking through the neighborhood

subjectively interpret as suspicious behavior based on his own paranoia

Show me hard objective evidence that Trayvon was doing anything suspicious prior to Zimmerman pursuing him.

He is extremely belligerent and hostile on the 911 tape.

Circumstantial.......you have no proof what so ever that this was all he was doing. You do not know what he was doing. You only have your opinions about what he was doing.

You are subjectively interpreting what Zimmerman was doing. You do not know what it was based on.....or you ignore what it was based on. You insert paranoia when you have nothing to base this on. What we do know is that Zimmerman was a neighborhood watchman. He watched the neighborhood. He called the police to report his suspicion.

Show me hard evidence that Trayvon wasn't up to anything suspicious. Define suspicious.

He calmly answered the questions posed by the police respectfully. What are you calling belligerent? What is hostile? I didn't hear it. Again, you are subjectively interpreting the data.

abraxas  posted on  2013-07-26   12:33:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#83. To: abraxas, James Deffenbach, strepsiptera (#79)

The only thing Trayvon was doing is walking through the neighborhood

subjectively interpret as suspicious behavior based on his own paranoia

Show me hard objective evidence that Trayvon was doing anything suspicious prior to Zimmerman pursuing him.

He is extremely belligerent and hostile on the 911 tape.

Ol' "twisted-winged parasites" head is going to explode with anger about this news...

nationalreport.net/george...ed-by-their-juvenile-son/

snip

George Zimmerman filed a civil suit today just before 5PM EST at the Seminole County, Florida, Courthouse. The suit alleges the parents of Trayvon Martin, failed to control their minor-age son on the evening of February 26, 2012, when Martin repeatedly assaulted Zimmerman, placing him in imminent fear for his life and resulting in the death of Martin.

The civil action specifies that Zimmerman acted in self defense resulting in the case being ruled a justifiable homicide by a jury trial that ended on Saturday with a verdict of not guilty.

Desperate state prosecutors charged the victim with 2nd degree murder though they had no evidence of a crime and hoping to stay off more violence and having Florida put to the torch at the criminal hands of rioters months before the start of the state’s tourist season. The complaint further specifies Zimmerman shares “zero-liability” in the death of Martin as he acted without malice and solely in self-defense. The amount of damages Zimmerman is seeking are unspecified.

scrapper2  posted on  2013-07-26   15:05:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#84. To: scrapper2, abraxas, , James Deffenbach, strepsiptera, titorite (#83) (Edited)

It was interesting reading through the comments on the thread that you linked to.

The argument seems to come down to four primary categories:

Those who assume Trayvon is innocent because he was black.

Those who assume Zimmerman is guilty because he is NOT black.

There is a small leavening of White Racists, but most of the real racism evident is Blacks assuming Zimmerman had to be guilty because he is NOT black.

Then there is the group which is looking at the actual evidence and asking, "What does the evidence show?"

In other words for those who are on the "Poooooooooooooor St. Trayvon" side of the argument it is ALL about race, and the assumption that because Zimmerman IS NOT black that he has to be guilty of stalking "Poooooooooooor St. Trayvon" regardless of what the evidence seems to show. As well is the factor of media bias where the images presented in the major media (over and over and over again) are all several years old showing Trayvon as a 13 or 14 year old kid. That imagery stuck. The major lamestream media has focused on those photos as opposed to more recent ones showing "Poooooooooooor St. Trayvon" with his "Grillwork", his comments on smoking dope, his highly sexualized violent streak, and his search for the ingredients to make "lean". Lean is an important element here as it, per users comments online, tends to induce psychoses and violent behavior. Of course acknowledging that is inconvenient to the "Pooooooooooooooor St. Trayvon" Crowd so they attempt to ignore it or evade it by calling people rayciss for daring to notice those facts.

The other side is looking at the evidence, which includes "Poooooooooooooor St. Trayvon's known, and proven, drug use, his own online comments that he likes fighting, that he was trained as a Martial Artist, had a history of criminality such as being kicked out of school for picking fights, and having stolen property found in his locker at school. As well we have the eyewitness testimony placing "Pooooooooooooooooooor St. Trayvon" on top applying a serious beat down of George Zimmerman combined with the physical evidence of the beat down.

The "Poooooooooooooor St. Trayvon" crowd keeps trying to divert from the facts, invent facts and suppositions that are either not relevant or not in evidence (such as assuming and arguing contrary to the evidence that "Pooooooooor St. Trayvon who appeared to be casing the neighborhood actually was just walking nonchalantly down the street and assuming without any evidence to support the contention that Zimmerman initiated contact with "Poooooooooooor St. Trayvon, and appear to have reached a conclusion based on their own prejudices and suppositions rather than on the available facts).

It is unfortunate that the young MAN (he was a 5' 11" Football Player not a little defenseless child) made some poor judgements and, by the evidence, apparently made an unprovoked attack on an armed man. I would also point out to the "Poooooooooooooor St. Trayvon" crowd that "Billy the Kid" was 16 when he killed his first man. Billy, by the way, was white.

Original_Intent  posted on  2013-07-26   16:29:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#122. To: Original_Intent (#84)

poooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooorooooooooooooooooooooooooor St. Trayvon

No one on the prosecution side has ever claimed that Trayvon was a saint, but when you and others who agree with you engage in vicious character assassination in order to justify the murder of a child, you force those of us who have problem with how he was killed to defend him.

Why is it unreasonable of me to attempt to defend Trayvon?

Am I obligated to say that he was scum and deserved what happened to him just because that is how others choose to see it? You are using a phony condescending straw man argument.

strepsiptera  posted on  2013-07-27   17:48:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#133. To: strepsiptera (#122)

Why is it unreasonable of me to attempt to defend Trayvon?

Actually I would not say unreasonable, but invincibly ignorant. Time and again you have evaded and avoided the facts only to substitute unsubstantiated assignment of a set of motives and behaviors to George Zimmerman which are NOT in evidence. In fact everything that is public about the man is that he was a good neighbor with a kind heart. Hardly the profile of someone who stalks someone and kills them, and it is in stark contrast to "Poooooooooooooooor St. Trayvon's" profile as a wannabe' gangsta' given to violence, and enjoying it.

Original_Intent  posted on  2013-07-27   19:10:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#144. To: Original_Intent (#133)

There is no such offense as being a "wannabe gangsta." Either document some evidence of gang activity or membership or drop the accusation. Etiher he was in a gang or he wasn't. Stop creating a department of precrime. This isn't minority report.

strepsiptera  posted on  2013-07-27   21:26:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#148. To: strepsiptera (#144)

There is no such offense as being a "wannabe gangsta."

I never said there was. However, and I already posted the links which you seem to have ignored, that demonstrated his behavior and attitudes, and they were not the behaviors and attitudes of an "Altar Boy". He, by his own profession, considered himself a gangsta' and considered it something "worthy" of aspiring to.

Again and again you evade and ignore the documented evidence.

Original_Intent  posted on  2013-07-27   21:39:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#149. To: Original_Intent (#148)

Again and again you evade and ignore the documented evidence.

He don't need no steenkin' evidence, he has feewings.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2013-07-27   21:41:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#151. To: James Deffenbach (#149)

Again and again you evade and ignore the documented evidence.

He don't need no steenkin' evidence, he has feewings.

An attitude typical of liberals, ideologues, the intellectually dishonest, and shills.

Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist)

8 Traits of a Disinformationist:

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

"Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil. Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require... or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world." ~ H. Michael Sweeney

Original_Intent  posted on  2013-07-27   22:12:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#153. To: Original_Intent (#151)

Show me one post where I have made an emotional non-rational argument. All you and Mr. Deffenbach have done is vent your spleens and call names.

Show me the proof that Trayvon was committing a crime on the night he was murdered. Show me the proof that Trayvon initiated physical violence without provocation.

You have no substantive arguments whatsoever.

strepsiptera  posted on  2013-07-27   22:58:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#182. To: strepsiptera (#153)

Show me the proof that Trayvon initiated physical violence without provocation.

Trayvon's gal pal said - tah dah!- Trayvon hit first.

Jeantel was the prosecutor's key witness.

Case closed.

See ya'. Please don't remember to vote.

dailycaller.com/2013/07/1...-trayvon-hit-first-video/

snip

In an interview with CNN’s Piers Morgan on Monday, Jeantel revealed that she thought Martin had just “whooped ass” on George Zimmerman, which ultimately led to Zimmerman discharging his firearm and killing Martin.

scrapper2  posted on  2013-07-28   4:20:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#200. To: scrapper2 (#182)

Trayvon's gal pal said - tah dah!- Trayvon hit first.

Jeantel was the prosecutor's key witness.

Jeantel is also mental retarded. So her testamony is of no value. You know why she was the "key" super star wittness? because the outcome was rigged and the case was thrown before it began...

Just how does Jeantel know trayvon hit first when she wasn't there? she didn't.

Jeantel perjured herself alot that day trying to be helpful... the retard cow should pay the price for it but the perjury laws do not seem to apply to anyone in the zimmerman trial.... funny that.

Gods honest truth is that nobody knows who threw the first punch.

But we do know one voice was running around screaming for help.

And standing your ground does not run from door to door in screaming for help only to be silenced at the end of a gun shot.

titorite  posted on  2013-07-29   4:09:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#215. To: titorite (#200)

And standing your ground does not run from door to door in screaming for help only to be silenced at the end of a gun shot.

Huh? What are saying here?

christine  posted on  2013-07-29   16:50:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#220. To: christine (#215)

Huh? What are saying here?

I am saying on one of those 911 calls you can clearly hear a voice screaming for most of the first half of the call.. You can hear the husband in the back round and the wife is on the phone with 911 and she is calling about the screaming and commotion.

In the back round of that 911 call a voice a screamng for help and that voice moves alot. It changes in echo, volume, clarity, who ever the voice belonged too it was on the move jumping from spot to spot.

Then their is a single gun shot when the screaming is loudest.

Then their is no more screaming for help....

One does not stand ones ground by running around from porch to porch of the place screaming for help.

George zimmerman was not running from porch to porch screaming for help...

Trayvon Martin was not chasing down an armed zimmerman from porch to porch.

IT was the other way around.

A pissy Zimmerman sour over the fact that "they always get away" just wanted to get him one... and he did. and florida is ok with it...

In no way was he standing his ground. Not from the sound of the 911 call...

Their was no fight.. nobody was being punched in the mouth MMA style as they yelled for help. No teeth got knocked loose. Zimmerman has a past of bragging on his myspace page about getting away with crime. ....

HE did not need to follow anyone... following someone is not standing your ground....

But trayvon might of stood up to zimmerman... and that was proly a fatal mistake. He could not of known about Zimmermans jewish roots by looking at him.

titorite  posted on  2013-07-31   22:10:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#223. To: titorite (#220)

In the back round of that 911 call a voice a screamng for help and that voice moves alot. It changes in echo, volume, clarity, who ever the voice belonged too it was on the move jumping from spot to spot.

running around from porch to porch of the place screaming for help.

Their was no fight.. nobody was being punched in the mouth MMA style as they yelled for help.

It is not that background scream that is moving, it is the person on the phone moving while on the phone.

There is not a shred of evidence to substantiate this "running around from porch to porch" scenario. Not one witness. This is a scenario that only lives in your imagination.

The evidence substantiates the claim of a fight--the bleeding nose, the wounds to the back of the head, the wounds to Trayvon's knuckles, the grass on Zimmerman's back. However, there is no evidence to substantiate the claim that "their (sic) was no fight."

How can you completely disregard the evidence when you make these claims?

abraxas  posted on  2013-08-01   12:35:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#224. To: abraxas (#223)

How can you completely disregard the evidence when you make these claims?

That one and strepsiptera are perfect examples of the need for the clown filter. People like them don't need any facts, they have their feewings and that is good enough for them.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2013-08-01   13:04:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 224.

#226. To: James Deffenbach (#224)

Like

christine  posted on  2013-08-01 13:07:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 224.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]