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: 126
105
<< 123  124  125    127  128  129 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Originally posted by popsmayhem
Please that voice analysists has been
BLOWN OUT OF THE WATER!!
how nice, they could only get
zimmermans sample but not treyvons!
Get real, the results reported have a 50/50
chance of NOT being his voice, just like what a guess
is. This is getting silly now. He says it is
not zimmerman on a 50/50?
I WONDER what chance it is treyvons voice maybe 50/50?
Lets ignore the 911 call where the kid
says the guy on top had on a white hoodie
Lets forget about a key eyewitness who
was not using software but SAW treyvon
on top of zimmerman and zimmerman screaming for help.
Lets just forget about john who SAW and heard zimmerman
screaming, these morons only used one sample and did not
even sample trayvons voice.
The eyewitness testimony smokes this theory
edit on 1-4-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)



Eye witness testimony is critical but it is the absolute least reliable in any court case. that is evidence and the science, like in these voice analysis is held in a much higher regard in a court of law.

I also find it interesting that you are saying listen to the this eye witness and this eye witness...but you forget there was like 8 or more people who 'witnessed' in some way or another yet you only use certain eye witnesses for your 'smoking gun'......you are all over the map. You can't say the eye witness is the smoking gun in this case and discount a portion of the eye witnesses. Absurd.


Please, a 50/50 chance your going to call scientific and proof?
How did they forget to do treyvons sample? I wonder if they did
what the odds would be it is NOT his voice? 50/50 maybe?
OUR GUESS IS A 50/50 shot one being treyvon one being martin.

Eyewitness testimony is generally presumed to be more reliable than circumstantial evidence. Studies have shown, however, that individual, separate witness testimony is often flawed, and parts of it can be meaningless. This can occur because of flaws in Eyewitness identification (such as faulty observation and recollection, or bias), or because a witness is lying. If several people witness a crime, it is probative to look for similarities in their collective descriptions to substantiate the facts of an event, keeping in mind the contrasts between individual descriptions.
An expert witness is one who allegedly has specialized knowledge relevant to the matter of interest, which knowledge purportedly helps to either make sense of other evidence, including other testimony, documentary evidence or physical evidence (e.g., a fingerprint).

.

edit on 1-4-2012 by popsmayhem because: w




posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


You don't understand science.

Yes there is a 50/50 chance. Zimmerman has been scientifically ruled out as being the screamer so who else does that leave?

Explain to me, since I don't understand, exactly why they needed a sample of Treyvon to analyze Zimmermans voice?



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


You don't understand science.

Yes there is a 50/50 chance. Zimmerman has been scientifically ruled out as being the screamer so who else does that leave?

Explain to me, since I don't understand, exactly why they needed a sample of Treyvon to analyze Zimmermans voice?


So we can know what chance it was not treyvons voice maybe it is a 50/50 also?????.
If it is a 50/50 not zimmerman and a 50.50 it was not treyvon where the hell does that leave us?
Back to square one folks.
Why only sample one person when two were involved?
Sounds like a agenda a bias one.
edit on 1-4-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


You don't understand science.

Yes there is a 50/50 chance. Zimmerman has been scientifically ruled out as being the screamer so who else does that leave?

Explain to me, since I don't understand, exactly why they needed a sample of Treyvon to analyze Zimmermans voice?


So we can know what chance it was not treyvons voice maybe it is a 50/50 also?????.
If it is a 50/50 not zimmerman and a 50.50 it was not treyvon where the hell does that leave us?
Back to square one folks.
Why only sample one person when two were involved?
Sounds like a agenda a bias one.
edit on 1-4-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)


Wow. Just wow. You really don't get it.

If there are two voices in question, Treyvon and Zimmerman. That is what makes it a 50/50 chance. You get that right? So if we can scientifically rule out the voice being Zimmernman, one of the 50/50...then what is the only other choice? Treyvon.

Its not the point that they only sampled one voice. It matters what the results of that sample were. Are you purposely baiting the board or are you really that unintelligent?



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
reply to post by popsmayhem
 


You don't understand science.

Yes there is a 50/50 chance. Zimmerman has been scientifically ruled out as being the screamer so who else does that leave?

Explain to me, since I don't understand, exactly why they needed a sample of Treyvon to analyze Zimmermans voice?


So we can know what chance it was not treyvons voice maybe it is a 50/50 also?????.
If it is a 50/50 not zimmerman and a 50.50 it was not treyvon where the hell does that leave us?
Back to square one folks.
Why only sample one person when two were involved?
Sounds like a agenda a bias one.
edit on 1-4-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)


50/50 doesn't mean thats its 50% chance that its Zimmerman's voice. You simply don't understand how it works.

EVERY HUMAN VOICE HAS SIMILARITIES.
EVERY HUMAN VOICE WILL MATCH ANOTHER HUMAN VOICE TO A PERCENTAGE

90%+ DISQUINTUSHES THAT VOICE FROM OTHERS

The only voice that will have no similarities with another human voice is an Alien. Unless you are now saying that Zimmerman is an alien, you will have a percentage of his voice that will match any other voice for anylisis.

YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SCIENCE.
edit on 1-4-2012 by spacedog1973 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Sorry, that theory doesn't hold up, not with the time frame. Even walking he was a minute or two walk from his door, There is 5 to 7 min unaccounted for. You are in denial over this fact. Zimmerman said that he ran, and there is no reason to believe he was lying before the killing took place, but even if you believe that TM girlfriend let us know that he was at least aware of Zimmerman so, if he was afraid at all he should have been at home in plenty of time even walking.

You are denying even the possibility that Zimmerman could be telling the truth, you have to entertain the possibility, you else you are bias. When you accept that possibility that Trayvon could have attacked Zimmerman the case falls together and makes more sense.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


I can easily look at the map an explain how he came in contact with Zimmerman. Zimmerman was following and made it to between the two buildings where TM likely came between them from the other end. Zimmerman started walking down the center middle rather than retracing his steps to see what he could see on the way back, but was still heading back to his car, when he got half way down the kid, who was hiding, jumped out of where he had to be hiding to create the time discrepancy and assaulted. That is just as much a possibility as your scenario, except mine explains that hole in the story.

Also I have been a scared teen, I know if I thought I was being followed and could get home and was within sight of the door I would slow down/hide just before getting to the door. It was less than a football field away. How long does it take you to walk a football field? How long to "walk fast?" How long to run?



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


I can easily look at the map an explain how he came in contact with Zimmerman. Zimmerman was following and made it to between the two buildings where TM likely came between them from the other end. Zimmerman started walking down the center middle rather than retracing his steps to see what he could see on the way back, but was still heading back to his car, when he got half way down the kid, who was hiding, jumped out of where he had to be hiding to create the time discrepancy and assaulted. That is just as much a possibility as your scenario, except mine explains that hole in the story.

Also I have been a scared teen, I know if I thought I was being followed and could get home and was within sight of the door I would slow down/hide just before getting to the door. It was less than a football field away. How long does it take you to walk a football field? How long to "walk fast?" How long to run?


I have to agree here is a map to give some insight..

Do we have to do ALL the work?



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Your first mistake is taking idiot assumptions. I hate that and it's obnoxious. Sean Hannity is one of my most hated pundits. Second, we have only heard second hand accounts of Zimmerman's story really. He could have said "I was heading back to my SUV" and they repeated it that he was getting back in and it makes him look guilty and it's out of his hand. Also you are even manipulating your info about me, because I am not a hardcore Zimmerman supporter, I support the truth. I supported Trayvon first, but I am not going to keep doing that when there is doubt and a man's name and life on the line.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


How is him being arrested in 2005 evidence against him? There is zero evidence against him in this case. The only evidence supports him. Show me one shred of evidence that supports that he somehow started a fight that he lost control of, that never injured Trayvon, before he shot him.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Sorry, that theory doesn't hold up, not with the time frame. Even walking he was a minute or two walk from his door, There is 5 to 7 min unaccounted for. You are in denial over this fact. Zimmerman said that he ran, and there is no reason to believe he was lying before the killing took place, but even if you believe that TM girlfriend let us know that he was at least aware of Zimmerman so, if he was afraid at all he should have been at home in plenty of time even walking.

You are denying even the possibility that Zimmerman could be telling the truth, you have to entertain the possibility, you else you are bias. When you accept that possibility that Trayvon could have attacked Zimmerman the case falls together and makes more sense.


How do you figure there is 5 to 7 mins unaccounted for? You must be in denial about the fact of where the body was found. The only for Treyvon to be killed where he was is for him to have been pursued by Zimmerman.

So if you are walking down the street, in a place you have every right to be, and a man is following you what obligation does Treyvon have to run from this man? He didn't know the coward was carrying a concealed weapon.

But my biggest concern is how you figure there is a 5 yo 7 min time period unaccounted for? He was on the phone with his girlfriend from 712 to 716 and according to police reports they were on scene at 717p. so where is all the missing time you claim?



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


The funeral director, didn't have reason to determine if there was damage to his hands at the time, plus he died, so without a cut or bruising, what exactly would he be looking for you think?

Also, I don't know, where was his dad and dad's gf? I mean with all the cops and gunshots a few feet from his house? I think their absence until the next day is pretty strange. Was it the next day they filed the missing person or a litter longer than after that?



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


There are 5 or so minutes between the end of the phone call and the gun shots in the timeline that is out. YOU must be in denial. The time is from when he disappeared from sight and the gunshots. You have to consider how long it would take to make that would from gate to his door period too, that could even raise some questions, but I am not talking about that. I am talking about from either the time Zimmerman saw him or the time Zimmerman said he ran (I know you believe that for some reason Zimmerman lied to paramedics before he shot the guy, don't know why he would, if he was clever enough to lie you'd think hed be clever enough to know a witness could call him out on it) and the time he was shot. There was more time than it would take to make the less than a football field run/walk home.

I am the only one of us that has entertained both sides of this.
edit on 1-4-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Originally posted by rebellender

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Originally posted by rebellender

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by Deranged74
 

So the police thought there was a case, and the prosecutor, thought otherwise. Isn't that a normal scenario? The prosecutor knows better than the police what is chargable, and what isn't, that is their job no? Police try to charge everything they can, and the prosecutor filters what is chargable or not.


Cop motto is "you are going to jail and let the judge sort it out."
In this case it never made it that far.


Also the State Attorney came out the scene and/or Sanford PD station that very night. Not the local DA the f'ing STATE ATTORNEY, now if that is routine procedure for the state attorney to come the crime scene within hours of it happening then he would have no time to do anything else but than to travel to crime scenes. Its hard to explain how many high ranking officials got involved in this case very very early on and why the lead investigators recommendation was not followed. The SPD may have made mistakes that night, but if the State Attorney had not over ruled him then we would not be here.

So you have to ask why would the State Attorney do that? Anyone who wants to support it please provide an example of another case where the State Attorney came out to the scene (which was a sunday night at 715 or so and some bad weather) the very night of the crime and then over rules what an experienced Homicide Detectives recommendation?


again you are quoting MSM Rating Quest media, You and I and everybody else do not know what protocal was followed here, we just are not privy to that info so as to select a fair and impartial Jury. Our minds are so filled whith he said she said that nobody could sit on a jury to impartially hear the case on Zimmerman VS. The People should this thing go to Trial........Now, should we limit HYPER MSM Free Speech so as to create an impartiality of justice...HAHAHA, there is a can of worms, no?


Are you saying you believe protocol is for the State Attorney to come out to every shooting in Florida? You can't actually believe that can you? We are quoting what has been confirmed by the media that you hate so much. It is not a secret that the State Attorney showed up that night.

And there are many people who could sit on a jury. We, on these forums are actively involved in the case, but there are plenty of people who aren't paying attention at all. A jury of his peers can and will be found.



is it protocal for the President of the United States to say "If I had a son he would look like Trayvon"
we on ATS represent an average of the community!!!
edit on 1-4-2012 by rebellender because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


How is him being arrested in 2005 evidence against him? There is zero evidence against him in this case. The only evidence supports him. Show me one shred of evidence that supports that he somehow started a fight that he lost control of, that never injured Trayvon, before he shot him.


Good thing you aren't a lawyer.

It has to do with it shows that he has history of initiating an attack....and on a police officer at that. I just love how people are so quick to dismiss Zimmermans criminal past. Zimmerman was sentenced to anger management in that case. Past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior. Zimmerman in the past had shown he is ok being an aggressor so it goes to show that he could be the aggressor in this case. Treyvon does not have any similar past to suggest he may be the aggressor.

The shred of evidence that he started the fight is the fact that he pursued Treyvon. If he had listen to the advice of 911 he wouldn't have killed Treyvon, but he took the matter into his own hands and the evidence of that is Treyvons dead body. His past suggest that he is an aggressive person, and now he is standing over a dead, unarmed, teenager.

Stand by your man.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Sorry, that theory doesn't hold up, not with the time frame. Even walking he was a minute or two walk from his door, There is 5 to 7 min unaccounted for. You are in denial over this fact. Zimmerman said that he ran, and there is no reason to believe he was lying before the killing took place, but even if you believe that TM girlfriend let us know that he was at least aware of Zimmerman so, if he was afraid at all he should have been at home in plenty of time even walking.

You are denying even the possibility that Zimmerman could be telling the truth, you have to entertain the possibility, you else you are bias. When you accept that possibility that Trayvon could have attacked Zimmerman the case falls together and makes more sense.


how can we assume that zimmerman is telling the truth when his story has kept changing and there are all kinds of holes in it? different witness accounts etc etc how about the different accounts his family have been giving that differ from the original story? of course they are changing wording and the facts to better suit their defense.

all of this is being investigated and hopefully it ends up with zimmerman being innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. after hearing about the joe horn case and how he got away with it there is no wonder there is so much outrage a lot of people have that in the back of their heads that the justice system does not always work.
in the joe horn case a neighbor witnessed a house next door being robbed by two men he called 911 and told the 911 operator he was about to go out there and confront AND SHOOT TO KILL them with a shotgun and that he was not going to let them get away. the 911 operator told him not to go outside that police were on their way. the 911 operator argued with joe horn for over 8 minutes, guess what? joe horn decided to take the law into his own hands went outside and killed the two UNARMED men but i ask you what "law" calls for the death sentence in a burglary???? at the very most those guys would have served ten years, and if trayvon was robbing houses in sanford that still does not call for his death.

notice i did not mention any of the races of any of the individuals, that is because i dont care what color any of them were, WRONG IS WRONG IS WRONG IS WRONG! that is why there is so much outrage, and rightfully so.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


No.. actually my point would make a great point in the trial, however you keep bringing up Zimmerman's past like it means anything. It would mean something if we didn't know he shot the kid, but we know he did. Do you know WHY he fought in the past? You just keep bringing up complete non sense. The past that is more telling would be the deceased because his capabilities are the ones that need to be questioned as the question is in what did he do.

You keep trying to throw these ridiculous insults "you'd make a terrible juror, you'd make at terrible lawyer" the fact is I am making a case you can't really refute because I have thought about this from both sides. You are the one using insults and deflections. Why don't you debate like a grown up?



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


Ask again the next time Treyvon is killed.

If he says that the second time Ill say that yes it is protocol.

What does the Presidents opinion have to do with the fact that Zimmerman is getting away with a crime? You can try and make this political but I won't play that game.

You just proved your bias. You are one of those people that you can not be on the same side as Obama on any subject. If Obama is for it, you are against it, if Obama is against it you are for it. This has nothing to do with Treyvon or Zimmerman, right or wrong, innocence or guilt for you .... I see you crystal clear now.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by conspiracy nut
 


We can assume that he was telling the truth when he was giving a play by play live to the 911 operator. There is no real reason to dispute it. He is getting out of the car, we can hear it. He is running, we can hear it. It just doesn't make sense for him to lie. I know you want it to be some conspiracy, where he premeditated and murdered the kid and lying about the kid running, but that just isn't reality.



posted on Apr, 1 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


He actually didn't prove his bias, it is questionable that Obama would touch this issue. It is politically motivated. There are many issues, he got on this one because everyone else was and he can't be too careful about alienating black voters. He has it pretty much in the bag, but if a bunch of people expect him to say something or he feels he needs to remind them of his background, he will do that.

It is undeniable that his decision to speak on this was a calculated move.



new topics

top topics



 
105
<< 123  124  125    127  128  129 >>

log in

join