It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Exclusive! First hand Witness: Trayvon Martin attacked Zimmerman Zimmerman Innocent Smoking Gun

page: 110
105
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   
If George Zimmerman was treated, by EMS Paramedics and Police Officers, for a wound to the back of his head, there would have been a dressing or patch covering the wound site treated, which would have been applied to prevent a future civil suit against the Fire and Police Departments. If wounded, as Zimmerman claims, and then treated by EMS Personnel, and the wound site not covered with a patch dressing, Zimmerman could later claim that his treatment was improper and infection at the wound site could occur. If Zimmerman refused treatment at the scene, there would be an "Injury Release Form" on file with the Fire Department. If the Sanford Police did not take Zimmerman's clothing at the shooting scene, how is it that so many people know there was significant blood loss for Zimmerman? If the clothing Zimmerman was wearing in the Police Garage Video is the clothing Zimmerman was wearing at the shooting scene, where is all of the blood evidence from the beating he took? The Police Department may have botched this investigation from the beginning.




posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by conspiracy nut
 


I never ever heard that or said that about a bush. I was under the impression that Trayvon confronted him on his way back to the car, never jumped out from a bush? He confronted him and punched him.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by conspiracy nut

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Yep. I just commented on it. When she spoke, she actually hurt their case. In her story Martin contacted Zimmerman first. This kind of squashes all the people saying Zimmerman confronted Martin and tried to detain him or flashed a gun. Martin confronted Zimmerman to ask he was following. This matches Zimmerman's story except he said Martin was aggressive. Could very well be her bias showing through. She may be cleaning up the same aspect Zimmerman spoke of.


doesent this make out zimmerman to be a liar? i thought trayvon jumped out from behind a bush and cheap shotted zimmerman knocking him down and then got on top of him and repeatedly bashed zimmermans head into the ground?????????????????? lets all just stop assuming what happened until the federal investigation has rounded up all the evidence and witnesses.


I think that was Zimmerman story #1 that they defended...they are on at least Version 3.0 of defending at this stage.
v4.0 to be released 4-1-12...stay tuned to see how they defend the new and improved upgraded story



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Deranged74
 


Oh yeah.. let's hang him on the impossibility of his removing a bandage 4 hours after the incident. Or your omniscience in knowing that the paramedics even used a gauze.

Cleaned and used liquid stitches would suffice if he refused further care. He couldn't sue if he refused further care also.

And you seem unaware that it was four hours later that the video was made.
edit on 30-3-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
And how do YOU KNOW TM didn't act first?
This is all crap and arguing of stuff NO ONE has
TRUE fact about. Pure speculation and racism.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused
 


It doesn't disprove anything. I could be in the middle of a sentence and punch you in the face. I could say "you have a problem now" and punch you in the face before you know what is up.

It is possible and it disproves nothing.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by spacedog1973
 


He was jumped. He didn't receive his damage from nowhere.
Come one be realistic. Do you think he got down and started banging his head against the gorund after everyone was outside witnessing? I haven't heard those reports yet. He was injured, it is not a conspiracy. The injuries were noted moments later in police reports.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Or because she knew that admitting he said that would implicate he started the fight. Are you dense?

Also I said it was an opinion piece not a source for anything. It does bring up some great points.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 



Christ..pay attention.
The fact that Trayvon came back that says something. He took off running. He was gone. Why did he appear again? Why would he go back if he was afraid. That is why the contact matters. It shows that Zimmerman didn't run him down. He came back for some reason. Why do you think he would come back?

Be real. If he was the scared kid that was hunted and stalked as everyone else says he would have run all the way home. Not run into a shadow somewhere or circled back around and confronted GZ. That makes the most sense.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Deranged74
 


Oh yeah.. let's hang him on the impossibility of his removing a bandage 4 hours after the incident. Or your omniscience in knowing that the paramedics even used a gauze.

Cleaned and used liquid stitches would suffice if he refused further care. He couldn't sue if he refused further care also.

And you seem unaware that it was four hours later that the video was made.
edit on 30-3-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)


It was not 4 hours later!!!!

It was 36 mins after police arrived on the scene. SPD has confirmed the time stamp is correct.

That video shows him 36 mins after the killing, and after he supposed had his head repeatedly bashed on to concrete.

Do not say it is 4 hours later again....here is proof. What is your arguments now?

Sanford police release full video of George Zimmerman



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   


It doesn't disprove anything. I could be in the middle of a sentence and punch you in the face. I could say "you have a problem now" and punch you in the face before you know what is up. It is possible and it disproves nothing.


Yep. And you would be the aggressor by putting your hands on me first. Thanks for proving my point.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 



Christ..pay attention.
The fact that Trayvon came back that says something. He took off running. He was gone. Why did he appear again? Why would he go back if he was afraid. That is why the contact matters. It shows that Zimmerman didn't run him down. He came back for some reason. Why do you think he would come back?

Be real. If he was the scared kid that was hunted and stalked as everyone else says he would have run all the way home. Not run into a shadow somewhere or circled back around and confronted GZ. That makes the most sense.


Tooth Fairy....pay attention.
Who says he came back? Maybe, just maybe Zimmerman kept pursuit, isn't that at all possible. I mean he had told dispatch he was in pursuit at one point, why is it a stretch to think he re started his mission?
Zimmerman stated 'these a'holes always get away'....what makes most sense is he was making damn sure 'this ahole didn't get away on his watch'......



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Or because she knew that admitting he said that would implicate he started the fight. Are you dense?

Also I said it was an opinion piece not a source for anything. It does bring up some great points.


So she has more of reason to lie than Zimmerman does?

It may bring up good points but it sure doesn't come up with any good answers.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Your source is at odds with my source. My source is MSNBC.


Msnbc’s Thomas Roberts speaks with contributor and Managing Editor for the Grio, Joy-Ann Reid, and Rep. Corrine Brown about the new surveillance video showing George Zimmerman four hours after the shooting of Trayvon Martin, and what it means for Zimmerman’s side of the story.


MSNBC

So yes, I say it again. It was four hours later. They wouldn't take him in after just 30 min it would take longer than that to get there and clear the scene and take witness reports. Sorry, 30 minutes is not a reasonable time frame.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Just to say it again.
It was four hours later that the video was made. I have a good source backing that up, and logic on my side.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


No, stop trolling.
She has more reason to lie than the police, medics, and eyewitnesses unrelated to the case.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Your source is at odds with my source. My source is MSNBC.


Msnbc’s Thomas Roberts speaks with contributor and Managing Editor for the Grio, Joy-Ann Reid, and Rep. Corrine Brown about the new surveillance video showing George Zimmerman four hours after the shooting of Trayvon Martin, and what it means for Zimmerman’s side of the story.


MSNBC

So yes, I say it again. It was four hours later. They wouldn't take him in after just 30 min it would take longer than that to get there and clear the scene and take witness reports. Sorry, 30 minutes is not a reasonable time frame.


So if you believe your source then you are saying that my source that states the SPD confirmed the time stamp are lying? Is that what you are saying?

He does not need to remain on the scene to get witness statements and for them to clear the scene.

But the point is you now believe that the SPD has lied to the media about the accuracy of the time stamp is that correct?



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


I argued this same point on this same thread earlier. It is not supported by evidence.
Sorry. I was on your side of the argument before, but it is not backed up.

Listen to the audio tape. It is most likely he was returning to meet the police. "What if" he continued to the chase is just that a what if. Evidence does not support this. It is also unlikely he could run down a 17 year old football player who had a place to stay in that neighborhood and was already out of sight with a huge headstart (the whole time Zimmerman was on the phone).

Sorry evidence is on Zimmerman's side. I know that breaks your heart, but it's just the way it is.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Or that your local Orlando source is basing the time stamp on faulty info of when the crime began.
It is unlikely they would have him at the police station in 30 minutes don't you think? He was cleaned up and saw medics before going to the police station. So the time it took to get there, talk to him, have him see medics, and then drive him to the police station is very unlikely to have occurred in 36 minutes.

I believe MSNBC over ClickOnOrlando or whatever.

Also.. the police never said that the time stamp was accurate, so the police didn't lie. You need to read your own source.

According to the IT department of the city of Sanford, the timestamp on the video is accurate, meaning Zimmerman was at the station 36 minutes after gunshots were heard on a 911 call.

edit on 30-3-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


I argued this same point on this same thread earlier. It is not supported by evidence.
Sorry. I was on your side of the argument before, but it is not backed up.

Listen to the audio tape. It is most likely he was returning to meet the police. "What if" he continued to the chase is just that a what if. Evidence does not support this. It is also unlikely he could run down a 17 year old football player who had a place to stay in that neighborhood and was already out of sight with a huge headstart (the whole time Zimmerman was on the phone).

Sorry evidence is on Zimmerman's side. I know that breaks your heart, but it's just the way it is.


'It's most likely'...you say...that means they are other likelihoods also, right?

You again are just taking everything that zimmerman says and discounting anything anyone else says. If it doesn't fit on the zimmerman side you discount it with out a thought, but if you can twist it to fit the a zimmerman defense you treat it like it is gospel.




top topics



 
105
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join