See other Editorial Articles
Title: An Open Letter to the Parents of Trayvon Martin
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Aug 6, 2013
Author: Glenda Wells
Post Date: 2013-08-06 00:10:23 by James Deffenbach
Keywords: None
Views: 3382
Comments: 237
Ms Fulton, Mr Martin I mourn your loss more than I can possibly say but let's be clear. Your son had as much opportunity to walk away as Mr Zimmerman did but chose instead to be aggressive himself. Just as a reminder, Mr Zimmerman did not use Stand Your Ground as a defense. The facts are indisputable that your son was on top and pounding Mr Zimmerman. Your son was not stalked. Mr Zimmerman was judged in a court of law to be not guilty therefore no punishment is warranted. Your son was depicted by the media as a young boy and portrayed as an innocent but let's be honest. We know that was not a true picture. Instead we learned you're son was a drug dealer and petty thief. Where were you when he should have been learning respect? Where were you when he needed the kind of guidance that would make him a good and decent man? Your efforts now seem like the desperate reach of parents trying to make up for in death what they failed in life. To think otherwise would paint you as a crass and heartless people looking for personal gain on the grave of a soul lost too soon. I am the Florida state coordinator for Gun Rights Across America. I represent more than 2,000 law abiding citizens who believe in our God-given right to defend ourselves, our families and our property against the kind of aggression displayed by your son that awful night and by countless thugs and criminals across the nation every day. GRAA has the support of thousands of members in every state and we have the backing of millions more in hundreds of Patriot and Constitutional groups around the country. We will fight any effort designed to give thugs and criminals power over law abiding citizens. We have no duty to retreat. We will not run and hide. We are many. We are mighty. And we vote. Respectfully and with heartfelt sadness. Glenda Wells
Gun Rights Across America, Florida State Coordinator
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-161) not displayed.
.
.
.
#162. To: GreyLmist (#160)
The unarmed person (TM) was the aggressor, and not the defender. Again, according to the sole eye witness, John Good, Z (the defender) was yelling for help. The jurists believed Z was indeed losing the fight badly as we subsequently learned and justifiably used deadly physical force to terminate the attack. Had TM survived he would have been charged with felonious assault.
Just the opposite happened. It moved from the grass up to the cement walkway. See Good's testimony.
Me at #158: That's not what he says here at 35:56-36:56. Do you have another source? Jethro Tull at #159: http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/people/fire-department/kevin-orourke-paramedic/ Name: Kevin Patrick O’Rourke Witness Summary: [Excerpts] ... They placed their 4-lead monitor on Martin and found he was asystole in all four leads. ... Zimmerman declined transport to the hospital. At the axiomamnesia.com site: Florida Department of Law Enforcement – March 24, 2012 (~ min) [11:09 AM audio interview of Firefighter/EMT O’Rourke more than a year later] axiomamnesia.com blurb: Zimmerman had what looked to be a fractured nose. Site Comment says that O'Rourke's lead crew member, Michael Brandy, wrote in the report that there was tenderness to the patient's nose. At 2:44-2:50 of the audio, O'Rourke says they placed their 4-lead [monitor] on Martin and determined that he was dead then at 5:18-5:23 he says that Martin was assessed with 3-lead. At 4:04-4:18, O'Rourke sounds agitated over being asked to clarify who he means by "we". At 5:14-5:18, the questioner says he isn't a Medic and O'Rourke makes a reply about not having to use colloquial/informal speech. He then makes a strange statement at 5:28-5:34 that (after he disconnected Martin and walked away from that scene) he went to treat Nano-Zimmerman. Nano-Zimmerman?? Says there at Wikipedia that Nano is a prefix meaning a billionth; a Greek-derived prefix meaning dwarf; nanoscience/nanotechnology. At 7:18-7:43 and again at 8:32-8:39, O'Rourke says that he recalls no statements made by Zimmerman in his presence. Meaning no statements from Zimmerman that he thought his nose or skull was fractured or that he was in pain and O'Rourke doesn't mention that he had a nosebleed. Even if O'Rourke believed that Zimmerman declined hospital transport (in contrast with his comments about hearing no statements made by Zimmerman in his presence), that wouldn't be the same thing as hearing him decline transport there. If Zimmerman did decline an option of transport to a hospital instead of going to the police station first, then that would indicate he probably didn't think himself that he was very seriously injured or was more concerned with the financial aspect. However, he's indicated that the police made the decision to take him to the station for questioning first, evidently because he had not been determined at the scene to have been seriously injured enough to require stitches or fracture X-rays with immediacy or further treatment. In addition to Zimmerman's CVSA-video statements cited above at 35:56-36:56 on the issue of his being transported directly to the police station, he also says with more detail earlier in the video at 0:06:38-0:07:26 that the police said they were going to bring him to the police station first. He says he spoke to his doctor later and was told that if he had been cleared at the site as not in emergency need of MRI/CT scans, that it was up to him if he wanted to pay for that after he was released from the police station. Around 0:04:40-0:05:00 he mentions his Psychologist and his medications at 0:15:27-0:15:47, Librax for his stomach and two narcotics: Aderall and Temazepam. Although he claims difficulty breathing through his nose at 35:04-25:15, it doesn't seem noticeable and he never complains of a headache from it being slammed into cement, nor does he appear to have trouble moving his neck and head. Noting here also that he writes in the CVSA video with his left hand at 0:03:07-0:03:38 to sign for a swab-test, like he's ambidextrous -- gestures Edited parenthesis wording at 3rd paragraph from the bottom + last paragraph. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
The State could be wrong about that. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Crump said Wednesday the injuries cited in Zimmerman's medical report do not clear him of shooting Martin. "You have to look at this in the full context," he said. "George Zimmerman made the decision to get out of his car, profile Trayvon Martin, pursue Trayvon Martin and confront him." He said the report shows that Martin was fighting for his life and the altercation never would have happened if Zimmerman had not pursued the teen. He also questioned the severity of Zimmerman's injuries. He said Zimmerman refused to go to the hospital at the scene
You would know about being wrong.
foolish words talking about the person like a small mind rather than the issue like a gentleman. ______________________________________ Suspect all media / resist bad propaganda/Learn NLP everyday everyway ;) (It's a more positive message)
Just the opposite happened. It moved from the grass up to the cement walkway. See Good's testimony. See Zimmerman's own statements about that -- here for example, where he clearly tells Hannity that he was able to get from the cement to the grass: video.foxnews.com: Interview segment with Sean Hannity at 5:20-5:39 Also, in the first 33 seconds of that video interview, he talks about walking to Retreat View Circle at the end of the long sidewalk where he thought he would meet with a police officer but he didn't wait there or give the non-emergency dispatcher an address for that street as directions (who he said he was on the phone with at the time in his CVSA interview at 0:28:50-0:30:32 and had claimed then was the reason he walked to that street). He could have gotten to an address for Retreat View Circle quicker by the walkway between the buildings to his left when he got out of his vehicle but giving any address for that street would delay the police (and EMT, if needed) from reaching the correct location from there. Even simpler, he could have gotten an address number for the street he was actually parked on (Twin Trees Lane - not Retreat View Circle) from the house in front of him or the one next door to it. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
There is no evidence that TM was the aggressor and Good's testimony isn't evidence of that. He did not see the start of the fight. The news footage of Z at the station that night doesn't show that he was losing the fight badly and neither do the videos the next day of his Reenactment and his CVSA interview. Justifiable use of deadly force to terminate an unarmed physical fight is not indicated by his appearance in any of those films and his hands showed no defensive wounds. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
[Crump] said Zimmerman refused to go to the hospital at the scene No evidence is reported in that article to support Crump's claim and Zimmerman's own statements say otherwise. I gave you the coordinates at Post #166 to verify what Zimmerman said about that himself in the CVSA interview at 0:06:38-0:07:26 and 0:35:56-0:36:56. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Wrong. We're talking about what Good testified to. He testified that TM was on top of Z "in the dominate position" delivering blows to Z "MMA, ground and pound style." Further, he testified that Z was screaming for help. Once again you mind has managed to skip off into areas that haven't been testified to.
Zimmerman refused to be hospitalized. This is sworn testimony of the first police officer on the scene. Officer Timothy Smith of the Sanford Police Department, the first officer on the scene, testified that Mr. Zimmerman, although he complained of dizziness, ultimately declined to be taken to the hospital.
So how's that "proof" of yours coming? You know, the proof that you claim to have that Martin was being chased by Zimmerman door to door while Martin was screaming for help...
Good Lord, since you seem to believe that Zimmerman is a minion of Satan, if not the devil himself, why don't you make it your mission to hunt him down and kill him? You do realize the jury didn't agree with you and found him not guilty so why do you persist? I believed O.J. Simpson was guilty of murdering his wife and Ron Goldman too and I think that he got away with it because of his race and money. But I don't know that I took on as much over that as some of you have over poor Saint Skittles (who was actually a thug in real life).
Paul Craig Roberts
When a person is proven to have gotten a fact wrong, the honorable thing to do is to acknowledge their error and move on. What's happening in this thread is a prime example of ignorance, as in lack of knowledge, coupled with a juvenile conspiratorial mindset.
Cross-referencing info at Post #49 of 4um Title: New Mural In Florida’s Capitol Building Shows Zimmerman Shooting Trayvon Martin Edited for spelling. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Wrong. We're talking about what Good testified to. He testified that TM was on top of Z "in the dominate position" delivering blows to Z "MMA, ground and pound style." Further, he testified that Z was screaming for help. That has nothing to do with seeing who was the aggressor/assaulter in starting the fight -- just a fight in process. You probably know that, really, but have some reason for insisting otherwise and making matters needlessly worse so that people lose even more hope and confidence in any due process in this country. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
It's hard for any of us to admit we're wrong about something but we are all wrong at times. And you are right, the honorable thing to do is to own up to it and thank those who have pointed out where you were in error. But we don't see much of that and none on this thread. Paul Craig Roberts
Show me anywhere, on this thread or elsewhere, where I argued who started the fight. Unlike you I'm not speculating on things that aren't in evidence, I'm simply offering you material that has been testified to, and subsequently accepted by the jury as fact. Now, don't leave this point you raised; show me *anywhere* where I argued as to who started the fight. If you aren't able to find it, be mature enough to acknowledge it.
Zimmerman refused to be hospitalized. This is sworn testimony of the first police officer on the scene. Officer Timothy Smith of the Sanford Police Department, the first officer on the scene, testified that Mr. Zimmerman, although he complained of dizziness, ultimately declined to be taken to the hospital. What are you trying to prove by ignoring Zimmerman's own statements that I've posted more than once? That he didn't think he was seriously injured? That he refused to go to the hospital unless Sanford paid those bills? That he lied in his statements? I don't know what your point is on this but no matter how many sources you cite to the contrary, Zimmerman himself stated that the police made the decision to transport him directly to the station and he did not opt to go to the hospital on his own after he was released from questioning either. Edited for spelling + grammar, last sentence. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
35:56 - 36:56 In the vid you provide, Z never discusses how that decision to go directly to the police station was arrived at. The sworn court testimony I've provided should clear up that part of your tangled conspiracy; he declined to be transported to the hospital at the scene of the shooting because that's what he wanted. Now, given that it's only you still arguing the outcome of the trial (yes, even Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Obama have dumped it) I strongly suggest you reconsider the evidence and join the real world.
What, no answer?
James Deffenbach at #181: It's hard for any of us to admit we're wrong about something but we are all wrong at times. And you are right, the honorable thing to do is to own up to it and thank those who have pointed out where you were in error. But we don't see much of that and none on this thread. Jethro Tull to me at #182: Show me anywhere, on this thread or elsewhere, where I argued who started the fight. Unlike you I'm not speculating on things that aren't in evidence, I'm simply offering you material that has been testified to, and subsequently accepted by the jury as fact. Now, don't leave this point you raised; show me *anywhere* where I argued as to who started the fight. If you aren't able to find it, be mature enough to acknowledge it. All throughout this thread, I have been discussing the issue of who started the fight in terms of the aggressor/assaulter. At #162, JT, you said: "The unarmed person (TM) was the aggressor, and not the defender. Again, according to the sole eye witness, John Good, Z (the defender) was yelling for help. ... Had TM survived he would have been charged with felonious assault." When I disagreed at #172, saying: "There is no evidence that TM was the aggressor and Good's testimony isn't evidence of that", you replied at #174 that was wrong and went into Good's testimony again as proof. My understanding was that we were discussing the aggressor/assaulter as the starter of the fight. You are claiming now, seemingly, to have a different interpretation of such terms, as if to mean TM overpowering GZ at the time John Good observed the situation and not that TM started the fight. I don't see that I erred in my view of the terms aggressor/assault but would not refuse to apologize if wrong. I apologize if I misunderstood your meaning but it sounds confusing to me and like moving the goal posts, unintentionally or not. As for the limited perspectives alluded to at #178, imo, that would be conspiratorially confining the scope of this as an Op to merely the Media's usual bag of racebaiting tricks, inflammatory hyping and "journalistic" deceit. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
I've only discussed what's in evidence, that would include Zs statement as to how it started, but I've never argued how it began. In fact, for the sake of debate, I've stated even if Z started the fight, TM was constrained by law to use only necessary force to terminate the assault. John Good, incredibly a witness for the prosecution, turned the case with his (already discussed too much) testimony, IMO.
In the vid you provide, Z never discusses how that decision to go directly to the police station was arrived at. The sworn court testimony I've provided should clear up that part of your tangled conspiracy; he declined to be transported to the hospital at the scene of the shooting because that's what he wanted. I also cited this section: 0:06:38-0:07:26 as well as 0:35:56-0:36:56. He never indicates that he refused transport or that it was his decision to make. He says that the police made that decision. If he was seriously injured enough to require further treatment immediately, likely he would have been transported to the hospital whether he wanted to go or not. I don't know what you mean by a tangled conspiracy about that, except to insult, or what your point is in arguing about it but I'm out of time right now to go round and round about it. Edited for formatting. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
I've discussed what's in evidence too. The evidence from Zimmerman himself is that he had moved to the grass before the time of the shooting and so wasn't having his head banged into the cement. Reference the Hannity video segment I cited above on that. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Show me. You do realize that nobody but you, and perhaps King Samir Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party, believe this right?
49:45 - 50:30 As per trial testimony, it was Zs decision whether to go to hospital or not. He chose to go directly to the police station. Now, if you're still are confused I suggest you call the Sanford PD, ask for Officer Timothy Smith, and call him a liar.
Show me. I already posted evidence of that at #171: ... he clearly tells Hannity that he was able to get from the cement to the grass: Here's the relevant transcript verification: HANNITY: ... And you made a statement to the police you wanted to get to the grass. Was that to prevent your head from banging on to the cement again? The Big Numbers Song - Video link set to start at 2:15 I realize that's what you are claiming but I think you are underestimating the number of people you've overlooked. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir. Do you realize this comment you are offering is a statement by Z which indicates he was wanting to get on to the grass to prevent additional blows to his head on the cement? Does that get thru to you?
10:30 - 11:30 ********* **********************
49:45 - 50:30 As per trial testimony, it was Zs decision whether to go to hospital or not. He chose to go directly to the police station. Now, if you're still are confused I suggest you call the Sanford PD, ask for Officer Timothy Smith, and call him a liar. The section of the video for Officer Smith's court testimony that you cited is not relevant to the issue of Z's statements in the CVSA interview about his being transported from the scene to the police station rather than the hospital and who made that decision there. According to him, it wasn't because of a refusal by him at that point to be transported to the hospital instead. The testimony you cited from Officer Smith is about Z claiming lightheadedness enroute sometime during the 15 minute ride to the police station (after having left the scene where Paramedics had released him from their care back to Officer Smith). Smith then contacted his Supervisor, who advised that Z be given the choice to go to the hospital to be examined for his claim of lightheadedness rather than continue on directly to the station. Smith asked him if he wanted to go the hospital or to the station and be reevaluated there by FD/the Fire Department and he said he wasn't sure what he should do. With no discussion from Smith about hospital expenses as Z's responsibility to impact his decision, Z decided that he didn't want to go to the hospital to be re-checked and so was taken to the station and didn't lose conciousness on the way. I don't know why it seems so important to you to discredit Zimmerman's CVSA interview statements about the on-scene decision issue of transport to the police station rather than the hospital [Post References: #166 - 1st YouTube linked for that evidence at 0:06:38-0:07:26 and 0:35:56-0:36:56 | also submitted at #173 and #188] but I don't object if that's what you want to do for some unfathomable reason that I'm not getting. There are quite a few problems with Officer Smith's testimony, though, which you cited that I think should be noted. For one, much emphasis was focused by Z's attorney on whether the back of his pants looked wetter than the front, said to be due to him being on his back on the ground during the fight. Officer Smith repeatedly answered that was his observation. However, that sounds contradictory to Z's claim of straddling Trayvon to allegedly restrain him facedown. If that were so, likely his pants from the knees down would have been as wet or wetter. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
This is the part relevant to the issue of necessary force to terminate the fight or not: Edited line 1. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Stacy Livingston, fire fighter and paramedic on the scene. 21:00 - 22:00 It was Zs call as to hospitalization or not.
HANNITY: And were you able to get to the grass? ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir. Wrong. The ongoing assault, coupled with an attempt by TM to snatch Zs gun, made DPF necessary in the eyes of the jury. Nothing you have mentioned, or continue to mention, was relevant in the mind of the jury. As much as that bothers you, and the radical, racial left, it's over and the good guys won. Deal with it.
[Zimmeran's Reenactment video] 10:30 - 11:30 Rephrasing for clarity: "The evidence from Zimmerman himself is that he had moved to the grass before the time of the shooting and so wasn't having his head banged into the cement" thereafter, if that had really even happened. Reference cbsnews.com. The Good guy "testified that he didn't see the person on top smashing the other person's head into the sidewalk, as Zimmerman claims Martin did before he fatally shot the teen." ... and "that he couldn't confirm the person on top was hitting the other person." The video timestamping should extend to 12:20. That is when he says he had squirmed off the cement and the self defense issue moved with him at the point -- from the realm of potentially deadly physical force that he claims was inflicted against him but no headbanging (intentional or accidental) was witnessed versus lethal gunfire being called "necessary force" to terminate a person's life in a fight that had shifted to the grass. At #105, you spoke of necessary force as equal force but, in courtroom-jargon, the sidewalk headbanger charge against Martin doesn't have "standing" for a fight continuance on the lawn. The assumption seems to be that it was Trayvon's intent for Zimmerman to be positioned with his head over the cement, rather than Z just landing that way, then getting slammed around haphazardly and unthinkingly by him in the heat of the fight. Z implied that his head was purposely being banged there but he was able to move out of danger of that area to the yard and he didn't claim that T was trying to prevent him from scooting away from the pavement. He asserted that T was trying by that time to muffle his yelling, not bang his head. Most likely, T wouldn't have been able to do both at the same time. Reference the Reenactment video link at 11:14-12:16. If you back up in that video to 8:56-9:34, then all his conflicting statements there and elsewhere about what he was doing on his supposed mission to Retreat View Circle by the longest route there and where he was to meet the police come into question. Back up further to 6:59 where he talks about T coming back from behind the building and circling his car -- not menacingly to start a fight or even speak audibly to him that would indicate his intent was other than to probably get the model and license number of his vehicle to report Z as a possible stalker. Then, inexplicably, Z claims that he couldn't remember the name of the street and got out of his car to allegedly go in search of an address for a street farther away from his location that he didn't give the dispatcher anyway. More probably he got out of his vehicle instead of waiting there for the police or at the clubhouse so as to prevent T from making a suspicious person report about him, if he could, as he had done about T. What's clear from his own statements in the course of the call with the dispatcher is that he had been following Trayvon. I'm not sure what Zimmerman's acquital symbolizes for those still rallying around him but it looks like a miscarriage of Justice, imo. By not waiting at his vehicle for the police, he's caused heaps of aggravations over the 2nd Amendment, self defense issues, and even for Neighborhood Watch groups and Homeowners Associations. On top of all that, the Stand Your Ground law is being targeted when it didn't even figure in his defense on account of Standing Your Ground in Pursuit of Someone isn't rightly what it's meant to be about. That's all on top of the racial agitation he's foisted on America. Cui Bono? ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Whoa there, are you telling us that the Zimmerman jury got the verdict wrong?? If yes, IYO, what should the verdict have been, what charge (s) do you consider appropriate, and what specific evidence supports your contention.
I believe they put too much stock in Zimmerman's credibility and got the verdict wrong, yes. They might have decided as they did because they didn't have full access to his problematic statements for intensive study as others not on the jury have had. Zimmerman's statements are so inconsistent and bizarre, too, that I suspect he might have been on a Vigilante-like hunting expedition that night -- looking to make trouble with malice aforethought when there otherwise wouldn't have been any. If this really happened, Murder in the 2nd Degree might have been an undercharge. At the very least, as I've noted before, Z exhibited reckless disregard, imo, for the life of someone who had used no weaponry against him when he did nothing to try and help or get help for Trayvon and also moved to prevent a call to the police for emergency help. I don't know what the degrees of Manslaughter stipulate on that, if anything, but I do not believe he had to shoot someone to death over a fight ongoing in the grass, nor would I accept his dubious word that he had to preemptively kill Martin to stop him from getting to his gun. He claimed in his statements that he thought Martin had been hitting him with something in his hands but at no point did he claim to have even tried to use his cellphone or keys as objects to strike back at him with more equal force to try and get away. He implausibly claims that he didn't hit at Martin at all in a supposedly lifethreating struggle and only tried to move his hands away. I think he could have fired a warning shot to try and stop the fight, if he wanted to, or aimed somewhere less lethal more easily. Instead, he risked the gun being grabbed or knocked out of his hand as he maneuvered it upward by his opponent's arm to shoot him in the chest. I think that shows his intent was to end the fight with more force than was necessary by killing him. If Zimmerman had so much as bought Trayvon a beer, he could have been charged with contributing to the underage drinking delinquency of a minor. I'm not sure what the appropriate charge against him for this should have been but his headbanging self defense plea fell on the wet grass, sort of like Trayvon's headset was said to have done. His preemptive strike scenario, alleged as if necessary force to keep Trayvon from getting his gun, would have been unnecessary in my view, is unsubstantiated, his word is slithery and his spin on that sounds Neocon-esque Creepy to me. Ironically, Officer Smith testified at 43:22-45:00 that Z (who neglected to help or get help and obstructed help for Trayvon) commented twice as if he was bewildered that no one had come out to help him while he was yelling. But somebody with a flashlight did come out to help, even though they didn't get there fast enough to do much, so that's just one more example (like claiming to have forgotten the name of the street he was on when there are only 3 streets in the complex) which indicates he has like memory flash-problems, maybe due to his prescribed controlled substance medications. Edited for spelling + last sentence. ------- "They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Your defense of TM has taken your twisted conspiratorial mind set to a new low. Anyone, by law, can follow another anywhere they want to. If the person being followed feels ill at ease, and has a phone as TM did, a call to 911 would have be the correct response. Zimmerman, regardless of how he came to be on his back getting his head knocked into concrete, had a right to defend himself, as he feared for his life. Try as they did, the State of Florida had absolutely no evidence to contradict this basic fact. This was as simple a case of self- defense, save for the insertion of Obama and the predictable Marxist race hucksters. I can only hope that one day you, or someone you love, is confronted by TM-like thug. A nasty thought indeed, but it is your ilk that releases these predators from their cages.
Comments (203 - 237) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestYou seem to be saying there that if an unarmed person is defending themself successfully in a struggle against an attacker, their attacker can shoot them to death in the heart and that is considered necessary force for the attacker's self defense, so they shouldn't be charged with anything if they claim the deceased made them fear for their life.
#163. To: GreyLmist (#160)
Additionally, even though Zimmerman says the fight had moved to the grass where he wasn't in danger of the cement
#164. To: GreyLmist (#160)
and his face didn't appear to have been beaten (just a small scratch on his nose and a small mark or two on his head
alleged (accepted in court as true, not alleged) to the fight) 
#165. To: GreyLmist (#160)
and a small mark or two on his head
alleged (not alleged, his injuries were accepted by the State as having been caused by TM) to the fight 
#166. To: Jethro Tull (#159)
(Edited)
Jethro Tull at #149: It was Zimmerman's decision to not go to the hospital, not the paramedics at the scene.
George Zimmerman Sanford Police Interview [Lie Detector-Polygraph] (February 27, 2012) - YouTube
twice three times that his gun was on his right hip at 0:32:36-0:0:32:42, at 0:32:53-0:33:04, and at 0:41:37-0:41:40, as well as in his Reenactment video at 12:27-12:50.
#167. To: Jethro Tull (#165)
not alleged, his injuries were accepted by the State as having been caused by TM
#168. To: GreyLmist (#166)
usatoday30.usatoday.com/n...medical-report/55022578/1
#169. To: GreyLmist (#167)
The State could be wrong about that.
#170. To: Jethro Tull (#169)
You would know about being wrong.
#171. To: Jethro Tull (#163)
Additionally, even though Zimmerman says the fight had moved to the grass where he wasn't in danger of the cement
#172. To: Jethro Tull (#162)
The unarmed person (TM) was the aggressor, and not the defender. Again, according to the sole eye witness, John Good, Z (the defender) was yelling for help. The jurists believed Z was indeed losing the fight badly as we subsequently learned and justifiably used deadly physical force to terminate the attack.
#173. To: Jethro Tull (#168)
usatoday30.usatoday.com/n...medical-report/55022578/1
#174. To: GreyLmist (#172)
There is no evidence that TM was the aggressor and Good's testimony isn't evidence of that
#175. To: GreyLmist (#173)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/29/us/neighbor-describes-glimpse-of-fight-in-zimmerman-case.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
#176. To: titorite (#170)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#177. To: GreyLmist (#172)
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
#178. To: James Deffenbach, Former Lurker (#177)
#179. To: All (#157)
(Edited)
#180. To: Jethro Tull (#174)
There is no evidence that TM was the aggressor and Good's testimony isn't evidence of that
#181. To: Jethro Tull (#178)
When a person is proven to have gotten a fact wrong, the honorable thing to do is to acknowledge their error and move on. What's happening in this thread is a prime example of ignorance, as in lack of knowledge, coupled with a juvenile conspiratorial mindset.
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
#182. To: GreyLmist (#180)
That has nothing to do with seeing who was the aggressor/assaulter in starting the fight
#183. To: Jethro Tull (#175)
(Edited)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/29/us/neighbor- describes-glimpse-of-fight-in-zimmerman-case.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
#184. To: GreyLmist, 4 (#183)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjRp-vIvTNg
#185. To: GreyLmist (#183)
Ping to #182
#186. To: Jethro Tull, James Deffenbach (#182)
Jethro Tull at #178: When a person is proven to have gotten a fact wrong, the honorable thing to do is to acknowledge their error and move on. What's happening in this thread is a prime example of ignorance, as in lack of knowledge, coupled with a juvenile conspiratorial mindset.
#187. To: GreyLmist (#186)
My understanding was that we were discussing the aggressor/assaulter as the starter of the fight.
#188. To: Jethro Tull (#184)
(Edited)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjRp- vIvTNg
35:56 - 36:56
#189. To: Jethro Tull (#187)
I've only discussed what's in evidence, that would include Zs statement as to how it started, but I've never argued how it began. In fact, for the sake of debate, I've stated even if Z started the fight, TM was constrained by law to use only necessary force to terminate the assault. John Good, incredibly a witness for the prosecution, turned the case with his (already discussed too much) testimony, IMO.
#190. To: GreyLmist, The Mystic Knights of Tir Na Nog, 4 (#189)
The evidence from Zimmerman himself is that he had moved to the grass before the time of the shooting and so wasn't having his head banged into the cement
#191. To: GreyLmist, 4 (#188)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xJWmVvuhnU
#192. To: Jethro Tull (#190)
The evidence from Zimmerman himself is that he had moved to the grass before the time of the shooting and so wasn't having his head banged into the cement
video.foxnews.com: Interview segment with Sean Hannity at 5:20-5:39
FOX Exclusive: George Zimmerman breaks silence on 'Hannity' - Transcript, Pg. 4
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
HANNITY: How close was that in proximity?
ZIMMERMAN: It butts up into the concrete.
HANNITY: And were you able to get to the grass?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.You do realize that nobody but you, and perhaps King Samir Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party, believe this right?
#193. To: GreyLmist (#192)
HANNITY: ... And you made a statement to the police you wanted to get to the grass. Was that to prevent your head from banging on to the cement again?
#194. To: GreyLmist (#189)
The evidence from Zimmerman himself is that he had moved to the grass before the time of the shooting and so wasn't having his head banged into the cement
#195. To: Jethro Tull (#191)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xJWmVvuhnU
#196. To: Jethro Tull (#193)
(Edited)
HANNITY: And were you able to get to the grass?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
#197. To: GreyLmist (#195)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ilv-U4Hb3-w
#198. To: GreyLmist (#196)
This is the relevant part to the issue of necessary force to terminate the fight or not:
#199. To: Jethro Tull (#194)
Me: The evidence from Zimmerman himself is that he had moved to the grass before the time of the shooting and so wasn't having his head banged into the cement
#200. To: GreyLmist (#199)
I'm not sure what Zimmerman's acquital symbolizes for those still rallying around him
#201. To: Jethro Tull (#200)
(Edited)
Whoa there, are you telling us that the Zimmerman jury got the verdict wrong??
If yes, IYO, what should the verdict have been, what charge (s) do you consider appropriate, and what specific evidence supports your contention.
#202. To: GreyLmist says Zimmerman is Guilty (#201)
.
.
.