View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently July 29th, 2014, 11:20 pm



Reply to topic  [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman 
Author Message
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9377
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Pablo wrote:
LionFan57 wrote:
This arrest and pending trial is a travesty of justice.


Someone was shot and killed, I think that deserves an arrest and trial. If he is innocent, let that play out in court. I don't see any "travesty" of justice but rather the process playing out as it should.

I also certainly don't think we know all the facts yet, can we not without judgement until a jury hears them all?


People are shot in self-defense all the time, and not arrested and no trial. IMO the "travesty of justice" is that he likely wouldn't even be tried if it weren't for the media making a big deal out of this case.


But that isn't the case here. Perhaps you are correct, but again not all the facts are out so lets withhold judgement. This guy might not be safe outside of custody right now given the emotions involved.

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


May 16th, 2012, 12:49 pm
Profile WWW
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9848
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Pablo wrote:
LionFan57 wrote:
This arrest and pending trial is a travesty of justice.


Someone was shot and killed, I think that deserves an arrest and trial. If he is innocent, let that play out in court. I don't see any "travesty" of justice but rather the process playing out as it should.

I also certainly don't think we know all the facts yet, can we not without judgement until a jury hears them all?


People are shot in self-defense all the time, and not arrested and no trial. IMO the "travesty of justice" is that he likely wouldn't even be tried if it weren't for the media making a big deal out of this case.


I disagree. Yes, people use guns in self-defense all that time. However, they are usually at their home, or in their vehicle at the time. Also, in many cases the "perpetrator" that gets shot has a weapon. In this case, there was no weapon, there was no crime committed and Zimmerman was not protecting his home, family or being pulled from his vehicle. There is ample reason to doubt his story, even despite his injuries. No witnesses to the actual shooting. That is the reason for a trial.

As Pablo said, we may not know all the facts of this case yet. But it all comes down to what Zimmerman said he saw. Was Martin simply walking home, or was he casing someone's house? We don't know that. And even if Martin was walking in the yard of someone who wasn't home, that doesn't necessarily mean he was in the midst of a criminal act.

If he's declared not guilty, so be it. But I feel there is enough loose strings that a trial should be taking place.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


May 16th, 2012, 12:57 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2005, 7:03 am
Posts: 7411
Location: Ford Field - 35 yard line / Row 32
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Pablo wrote:
LionFan57 wrote:
This arrest and pending trial is a travesty of justice.


Someone was shot and killed, I think that deserves an arrest and trial. If he is innocent, let that play out in court. I don't see any "travesty" of justice but rather the process playing out as it should.

I also certainly don't think we know all the facts yet, can we not without judgement until a jury hears them all?


People are shot in self-defense all the time, and not arrested and no trial. IMO the "travesty of justice" is that he likely wouldn't even be tried if it weren't for the media making a big deal out of this case.


That's exactly what I'm talking about here! The police did their investigation at the scene. Saw the beating Zimmerman took; Talked to witnesses; Studied the crime scene: Even took GZ into custody, questioned and then released him. It wasn't til the media lied, Al Sharpton showed up and the Black Panthers threatened retribution that the governor got involved. It's ridiculous!! This situation would have NEVER gotten the attention of the governor if it wasn't for the constant liberal media blitz that took place. Zimmerman got thrown under the bus!


m2karateman wrote:
I disagree. Yes, people use guns in self-defense all that time. However, they are usually at their home, or in their vehicle at the time. Also, in many cases the "perpetrator" that gets shot has a weapon. In this case, there was no weapon, there was no crime committed and Zimmerman was not protecting his home, family or being pulled from his vehicle. There is ample reason to doubt his story, even despite his injuries. No witnesses to the actual shooting. That is the reason for a trial.

As Pablo said, we may not know all the facts of this case yet. But it all comes down to what Zimmerman said he saw. Was Martin simply walking home, or was he casing someone's house? We don't know that. And even if Martin was walking in the yard of someone who wasn't home, that doesn't necessarily mean he was in the midst of a criminal act.

If he's declared not guilty, so be it. But I feel there is enough loose strings that a trial should be taking place.



WHAT!? You might want to reread the article I posted. I don't know how you can say, "it all comes down to what Zimmerman said he saw." How about the evidence of, "...Zimmerman was diagnosed with a 'closed fracture' of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury..." suficent that, "Zimmerman sought an appointment to get legal clearance to return to work." WTF??? Do you think GZ did that to himself? Do you think Martin would have attacked Zimmerman if the gun was already drawn and pointed at him? Do you think the witness that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman (and no gun in his hand) made up that story? I think not!! I'd have shot the little bastard too. And probably not just once.

_________________
Image


May 16th, 2012, 2:50 pm
Profile WWW
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9377
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
Funny thing is LF57, I saw footage of Zimmerman the night he was brought in for questioning and didn't see any black eyes, or a busted nose, or any lacerations. The evidence you cite seems to be in conflict with what I saw with my own two eyes.

Can you provide a picture or youtube video ccollaborating these claims.

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


May 16th, 2012, 3:02 pm
Profile WWW
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
m2karateman wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Pablo wrote:
LionFan57 wrote:
This arrest and pending trial is a travesty of justice.


Someone was shot and killed, I think that deserves an arrest and trial. If he is innocent, let that play out in court. I don't see any "travesty" of justice but rather the process playing out as it should.

I also certainly don't think we know all the facts yet, can we not without judgement until a jury hears them all?


People are shot in self-defense all the time, and not arrested and no trial. IMO the "travesty of justice" is that he likely wouldn't even be tried if it weren't for the media making a big deal out of this case.


I disagree. Yes, people use guns in self-defense all that time. However, they are usually at their home, or in their vehicle at the time. Also, in many cases the "perpetrator" that gets shot has a weapon. In this case, there was no weapon, there was no crime committed and Zimmerman was not protecting his home, family or being pulled from his vehicle. There is ample reason to doubt his story, even despite his injuries. No witnesses to the actual shooting. That is the reason for a trial.

As Pablo said, we may not know all the facts of this case yet. But it all comes down to what Zimmerman said he saw. Was Martin simply walking home, or was he casing someone's house? We don't know that. And even if Martin was walking in the yard of someone who wasn't home, that doesn't necessarily mean he was in the midst of a criminal act.

If he's declared not guilty, so be it. But I feel there is enough loose strings that a trial should be taking place.



The fact that he wasn't arrested until 3 weeks after the event, IMO, dictate that FL likely wouldn't have prosecuted the guy had there not been so much media attention.

It's well established that he was in someone else's yard, but the media made an excuse for his whereabouts by saying that his Uncle "lived in the area." He wasn't in his Uncle's yard, he wasn't in a friend's yard, he was in a stranger's yard, period. No one knows his motives for being there, but I highly doubt that his intent was innocent. Regardless, his activity was "suspicious."


May 16th, 2012, 4:19 pm
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9848
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
It's very easy to say his motive for being in another persons yard was simply for criminal reasons.

I have said before that he may have noticed Zimmerman following him, and felt like he was being set up for a robbery. Did he know Zimmerman? Did he know he was simply part of the neighborhood watch program? My understanding on the first question is no. And the likely answer to the second question is a no.

So, someone you don't know is following you. You are walking along, minding your own business....but the guy keeps following you, watching you.

You wouldn't get creeped out by that? I would immediately think the guy is either setting me up for someone else to rob me, or is waiting for the right moment to rob me himself. And if I had to run across someone elses lawn to get away from the guy, I would. And at the same time, if I noticed the guy wasn't paying attention after he was chasing after me, I may take that opportunity to knock his butt down and ask a few questions myself.

That is PRECISELY why I say we don't know all the facts of what happened. Did Martin attack Zimmerman in what he felt was his own sekf-defense? It's not ridiculous or out of the question given the fact that Zimmerman was following him. Did Zimmerman call out to Martin and possibly say something to draw his ire? Again, we don't know that...and we'll never know that. All that the "witness" saw was the aftermath of what lead up to Martin going after Zimmerman. And despite his injuries, it remains unclear as to whether or not Zimmerman was in that much danger. As Pablo said, I saw the images of Zimmerman when he was initially brought to the station, and I saw no black eyes. And I'm sorry, but your eye swells up within seconds....not days afterwards.

This case is not cut and dried LF57. There is still some doubt as to whether Zimmerman did what he HAD to do, or what he WANTED to do. If I have that doubt, and Pablo has that doubt, then there IS room for others to doubt this and give cause for a trial.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


May 16th, 2012, 5:11 pm
Profile
Online
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3115
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
Pablo wrote:
Funny thing is LF57, I saw footage of Zimmerman the night he was brought in for questioning and didn't see any black eyes, or a busted nose, or any lacerations. The evidence you cite seems to be in conflict with what I saw with my own two eyes.

Can you provide a picture or youtube video ccollaborating these claims.

You mean like this photo?
Image
This was reportedly taken 3 minutes after the shooting (taken by a witness). It's the only image I know of that shows any evidence of injury. But it does at least seem to show that he did have his head injured by something.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


May 16th, 2012, 8:24 pm
Profile
Junior Varsity

Joined: January 24th, 2006, 8:52 pm
Posts: 180
Location: Chicago
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
You mean like this photo?
Image


Stigmata.


May 17th, 2012, 2:24 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2005, 7:03 am
Posts: 7411
Location: Ford Field - 35 yard line / Row 32
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
Pablo wrote:
Funny thing is LF57, I saw footage of Zimmerman the night he was brought in for questioning and didn't see any black eyes, or a busted nose, or any lacerations. The evidence you cite seems to be in conflict with what I saw with my own two eyes.

Can you provide a picture or youtube video ccollaborating these claims.

You mean like this photo?
Image
This was reportedly taken 3 minutes after the shooting (taken by a witness). It's the only image I know of that shows any evidence of injury. But it does at least seem to show that he did have his head injured by something.



Thanks TJ. I would have had to search a long time for this.

Pablo, therein lies the problem. You were the victim of some very bad - in fact fraudulent - news reporting. The liberal media perpetrated a fraud on our nation regarding this case. They lied, used inflammatory comments and shaped the thoughts of far too many people. This incident should be a great learning for this country. There are news sources that simply can NOT be trusted! They have an agenda.

_________________
Image


May 17th, 2012, 9:15 am
Profile WWW
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9377
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
LionFan57 wrote:
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
Pablo wrote:
Funny thing is LF57, I saw footage of Zimmerman the night he was brought in for questioning and didn't see any black eyes, or a busted nose, or any lacerations. The evidence you cite seems to be in conflict with what I saw with my own two eyes.

Can you provide a picture or youtube video ccollaborating these claims.

You mean like this photo?
Image
This was reportedly taken 3 minutes after the shooting (taken by a witness). It's the only image I know of that shows any evidence of injury. But it does at least seem to show that he did have his head injured by something.



Thanks TJ. I would have had to search a long time for this.

Pablo, therein lies the problem. You were the victim of some very bad - in fact fraudulent - news reporting. The liberal media perpetrated a fraud on our nation regarding this case. They lied, used inflammatory comments and shaped the thoughts of far too many people. This incident should be a great learning for this country. There are news sources that simply can NOT be trusted! They have an agenda.


Thanks for the picture. How am I the victim of bad news reporting? I just asked for evidence so I can come to a conclusion myself and honestly have paid very little attention to this story. I also find it interesting that it is one of these "liberal news organizations" that is being used for the evidence that I requested. Then again, based on the logic here I can no longer use this information as it may be a "fraud" or a "lie" and they can't be trusted anyways.

Based on the little information that I know it still seems to me that the legal process has to work out. It seems like some of you are claiming his innocence without access to all the information - that is a very scary thought process IMO. I'm not claiming the guy innocent or guilty, but rather calling for the justice process to play itself out. Quite honestly, I'm not suring why any of you have an issue with that?

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


May 17th, 2012, 9:38 am
Profile WWW
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3712
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
I know very little about this. I avoid TV news....I am curious though...

What Fraud did the media commit? where did they lie? From what In saw it was slanted and biased on the reporting for it...helped by a certain BBall team in Miami, and then moreso by that Clinton shemale person...

I see where you are angry...but I missed the fraud and the lies...

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


May 17th, 2012, 9:46 am
Profile
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
regularjoe12 wrote:
I know very little about this. I avoid TV news....I am curious though...

What Fraud did the media commit? where did they lie? From what In saw it was slanted and biased on the reporting for it...helped by a certain BBall team in Miami, and then moreso by that Clinton shemale person...

I see where you are angry...but I missed the fraud and the lies...


The media did everything they could to make it seem like Zimmerman was a racist and hunted Martin down to execute him.


May 17th, 2012, 5:10 pm
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
m2karateman wrote:
It's very easy to say his motive for being in another persons yard was simply for criminal reasons.

I have said before that he may have noticed Zimmerman following him, and felt like he was being set up for a robbery. Did he know Zimmerman? Did he know he was simply part of the neighborhood watch program? My understanding on the first question is no. And the likely answer to the second question is a no.

So, someone you don't know is following you. You are walking along, minding your own business....but the guy keeps following you, watching you.

You wouldn't get creeped out by that? I would immediately think the guy is either setting me up for someone else to rob me, or is waiting for the right moment to rob me himself. And if I had to run across someone elses lawn to get away from the guy, I would. And at the same time, if I noticed the guy wasn't paying attention after he was chasing after me, I may take that opportunity to knock his butt down and ask a few questions myself.

That is PRECISELY why I say we don't know all the facts of what happened. Did Martin attack Zimmerman in what he felt was his own sekf-defense? It's not ridiculous or out of the question given the fact that Zimmerman was following him. Did Zimmerman call out to Martin and possibly say something to draw his ire? Again, we don't know that...and we'll never know that. All that the "witness" saw was the aftermath of what lead up to Martin going after Zimmerman. And despite his injuries, it remains unclear as to whether or not Zimmerman was in that much danger. As Pablo said, I saw the images of Zimmerman when he was initially brought to the station, and I saw no black eyes. And I'm sorry, but your eye swells up within seconds....not days afterwards.

This case is not cut and dried LF57. There is still some doubt as to whether Zimmerman did what he HAD to do, or what he WANTED to do. If I have that doubt, and Pablo has that doubt, then there IS room for others to doubt this and give cause for a trial.



He wasn't in their yard planting flowers M2. I'm sorry, but it is a very safe assumption that if someone is in a yard that doesn't belong to them and they weren't invited that they ARE committing a crime (for one, because trespassing is a crime, but more importantly because they really have no other reason for being there).


It doesn't matter if Martin felt like he was being followed. That isn't a reason to beat the hell out of someone. It doesn't matter if Martin felt like he was "being set up for a robbery" (highly doubtful, given the neighborhood and Zimmerman's demeanor, but w/e). It's unreasonable to attack someone in that situation. If someone "chases you" and "doesn't pay attention" you're not entitled to "knock them down" and talk to them. Sorry, but following someone isn't a crime, and doing so doesn't give you the right to harm them physically.

This isn't about whether or not Zimmerman "had" to shoot Martin or not, this is about whether or not he reasonably felt his life was threatened, and IMO it's pretty clear that he did. Your case brings up a bunch of "what ifs," but do you know what "what ifs" are? Reasonable doubt!

That's my whole point. You talk of Zimmerman being the only one to know the truth as if it hurts Zimmerman. The bottom line is that is/was ALL the prosecutor really had to go off of (the witness reports support Zimmerman's claims), and the prosecutor really didn't have enough to charge Zimmerman in the first place. Now he has over-charged Zimmerman, most likely because the media demanded it. That in itself is a tragedy of justice. The media shouldn't dictate the law.


May 17th, 2012, 5:16 pm
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9848
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
wjb21ndtown wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
It's very easy to say his motive for being in another persons yard was simply for criminal reasons.

I have said before that he may have noticed Zimmerman following him, and felt like he was being set up for a robbery. Did he know Zimmerman? Did he know he was simply part of the neighborhood watch program? My understanding on the first question is no. And the likely answer to the second question is a no.

So, someone you don't know is following you. You are walking along, minding your own business....but the guy keeps following you, watching you.

You wouldn't get creeped out by that? I would immediately think the guy is either setting me up for someone else to rob me, or is waiting for the right moment to rob me himself. And if I had to run across someone elses lawn to get away from the guy, I would. And at the same time, if I noticed the guy wasn't paying attention after he was chasing after me, I may take that opportunity to knock his butt down and ask a few questions myself.

That is PRECISELY why I say we don't know all the facts of what happened. Did Martin attack Zimmerman in what he felt was his own sekf-defense? It's not ridiculous or out of the question given the fact that Zimmerman was following him. Did Zimmerman call out to Martin and possibly say something to draw his ire? Again, we don't know that...and we'll never know that. All that the "witness" saw was the aftermath of what lead up to Martin going after Zimmerman. And despite his injuries, it remains unclear as to whether or not Zimmerman was in that much danger. As Pablo said, I saw the images of Zimmerman when he was initially brought to the station, and I saw no black eyes. And I'm sorry, but your eye swells up within seconds....not days afterwards.

This case is not cut and dried LF57. There is still some doubt as to whether Zimmerman did what he HAD to do, or what he WANTED to do. If I have that doubt, and Pablo has that doubt, then there IS room for others to doubt this and give cause for a trial.



He wasn't in their yard planting flowers M2. I'm sorry, but it is a very safe assumption that if someone is in a yard that doesn't belong to them and they weren't invited that they ARE committing a crime (for one, because trespassing is a crime, but more importantly because they really have no other reason for being there).


Well then I guess every mail delivery person, every paper deliver person, and any salesman going door to door is a criminal. The assumption you make is NOT safe. And if someone is following you, will you avoid going into someone's yard because you may be seen as being there to commit a crime? I HIGHLY, HIGHLY doubt it. I don't think you would give a second thought to trespassing, particularly if you feel your life may be in danger.

wjb21ndtown wrote:
It doesn't matter if Martin felt like he was being followed. That isn't a reason to beat the hell out of someone. It doesn't matter if Martin felt like he was "being set up for a robbery" (highly doubtful, given the neighborhood and Zimmerman's demeanor, but w/e). It's unreasonable to attack someone in that situation. If someone "chases you" and "doesn't pay attention" you're not entitled to "knock them down" and talk to them. Sorry, but following someone isn't a crime, and doing so doesn't give you the right to harm them physically.


Um, excuse me. I know you're a lawyer and all, but a person does not have to wait until they are attacked before they can act. Were Martin still alive, he could easily say he felt as if he was being threatened by Martin following him, and many reasonable people would understand his feelings. It's like saying you can't hit someone until they throw the first punch. You can't just hit a person if they haven't done anything to threaten you or make you feel like you are in danger. But a threat, either through oral communication or by action that is perceived by someone as such, and with the very real possibility of that threat being carried out, is a reasonable assumption and can be acted upon in self defense. This I know. And while you say following someone isn't a crime, I say it can be perceived as a threat, to which Martin had a right to defend himself.

wjb21ndtown wrote:
This isn't about whether or not Zimmerman "had" to shoot Martin or not, this is about whether or not he reasonably felt his life was threatened, and IMO it's pretty clear that he did. Your case brings up a bunch of "what ifs," but do you know what "what ifs" are? Reasonable doubt!


And that's fine. But, as Pablo said, what is the problem with letting the facts play out in court. If he's found not guilty, then so be it. Police take folks into custody after the initial crime all the time. Reasonable doubt is something that is supposed to play out in court, not in the precinct.

wjb21ndtown wrote:
That's my whole point. You talk of Zimmerman being the only one to know the truth as if it hurts Zimmerman. The bottom line is that is/was ALL the prosecutor really had to go off of (the witness reports support Zimmerman's claims), and the prosecutor really didn't have enough to charge Zimmerman in the first place. Now he has over-charged Zimmerman, most likely because the media demanded it. That in itself is a tragedy of justice. The media shouldn't dictate the law.


I never said it hurts Zimmerman. I am actually saying it's pretty convenient for Zimmerman that nobody actually saw the prelude to the entire incident prior to the shooting. There is no way of knowing what prompted Martin to attack Zimmerman, or if there was any form of provocation.

All I know is this, being a gun owner I know that if someone is attacking me, I don't immediately draw the gun. I know that if I have time to draw my gun, I have time to do other things. I'm not saying that it's unreasonable to think Zimmerman couldn't have felt like his life was in danger. But that is SUPPOSED to be your absolute last resort, not your first inclination. I just feel that Zimmerman did what he wanted to do, not what he actually HAD to do.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


May 17th, 2012, 6:26 pm
Profile
Online
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3115
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post Re: Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman
I agree that this needs to play out in court and see where the evidence points. But, thus far it seems the evidence shows that Zimmerman may have indeed been acting in self defense. Here's an even more clear picture:

Image

LInk to the article it came from: http://abcnews.go.com/US/cops-witnesses-back-george-zimmermans-version/story?id=16371852#.T7WkVXlYsaC

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


May 17th, 2012, 9:23 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.