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

Originally posted by rebellender

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.

trayvon would look like anyone of our sons from behind wearing a hood. god forbid your son is wearing a hood and walking in the rain and some overzealous neighborhood watch guy thinks he is up to no good. i'm sure if it did happen and lets say your son was not shot and killed and lived to tell you about the confrontation, your fatherly instincts would kick in and you would go confront the jerk that thought your kid was up to no good for WWH "walking while hooded".
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)

reply to post by conspiracy nut


Yeah.. him being innocent until proven guilty is what I wanted, but loony hypocrites such as yourself that think they know something from the #ty "facts" gleamed from the net and from the news have ruined the jury pool.

That is the kinda bull# I reject and you embrace.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
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?

I keep bringing up the evidence as it is present. You keep finding anyway you can to defend Zimmerman. It doesn't matter what the point is. Every single point you automatically think of how you can spin it to fit that Zimmerman is guilt free. Just the fact that you can't grasp that Zimmermans past is extremely important is telling about how you are viewing this case. Yes we know he shot Treyvon and that is exactly why his past is important....he shot someone!!!!

And not to mention you think the past of the deceased is MORE important than that of the shooter. The past of the deceased is important, I agree, but it is not MORE important than the killers past. That is just absurd.

Im sorry you find me saying you would be a bad lawyer insulting, but you would.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by conspiracy nut

 

Yeah.. him being innocent until proven guilty is what I wanted, but loony hypocrites such as yourself that think they know something from the #ty "facts" gleamed from the net and from the news have ruined the jury pool.

That is the kinda bull# I reject and you embrace.

you are calling me a loony hypocrite? that is a very mature way to debate me. i dont have to resort to name calling to address my opinions. shame on you.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
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.

Bull. He got into because he was asked a question by a reporter. Had he said 'no comment' then your side would have been screaming he isn't supporting black. Obama didn't inject himself in this issue the media did that for him.
How was it calculated. Do you think he made that journalist ask him about Treyvon Martin? It's not like the White House put out a press release.

And none of what Obama says has any bearing on this case. None. Zero. Ziltch. Zimmerman is guilty or not guilty whether Obama says so or not.

reply to post by rebellender


trayvon would look like anyone of our sons from behind wearing a hood. god forbid your son is wearing a hood and walking in the rain and some overzealous neighborhood watch guy thinks he is up to no good. i'm sure if it did happen and lets say your son was not shot and killed and lived to tell you about the confrontation, your fatherly instincts would kick in and you would go confront the jerk that thought your kid was up to no good for WWH "walking while hooded".

reply to post by pizzanazi75


No.. you have presented your ideas, There is no actual evidence. Nothing that proves that Zimmerman is lying about his self defense. Eyewitnesses, police and medics corroborate it and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.

The only thing you guys consider evidence is a funeral director, from a big city with lots of deaths, including shooting deaths, not being able to remember the hands of a kid that was quietly buried two weeks before anyone would even think to look at his hands.

Sorry there is no evidence.

reply to post by conspiracy nut


just like he just told me he was insulted because I said he wouldn't make a good lawyer then he turns around and calls you loony......the logic of some people.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75

 

No.. you have presented your ideas, There is no actual evidence. Nothing that proves that Zimmerman is lying about his self defense. Eyewitnesses, police and medics corroborate it and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.

The only thing you guys consider evidence is a funeral director, from a big city with lots of deaths, including shooting deaths, not being able to remember the hands of a kid that was quietly buried two weeks before anyone would even think to look at his hands.

Sorry there is no evidence.

so by your way of thinking do you believe there was no reason not to believe oj's, casey anthony's, michael jacksons, etc etc etc self defense?

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75

 

No.. you have presented your ideas, There is no actual evidence. Nothing that proves that Zimmerman is lying about his self defense. Eyewitnesses, police and medics corroborate it and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.

The only thing you guys consider evidence is a funeral director, from a big city with lots of deaths, including shooting deaths, not being able to remember the hands of a kid that was quietly buried two weeks before anyone would even think to look at his hands.

Sorry there is no evidence.

So the only evidence you say we have presented is the funeral director?

Your a troll who knows nothing about this case and Im putting extreme wear and tear on my keyboard giving the evidence over and over and over.

reply to post by pizzanazi75


Well it does because to a lot of people it is going to appear as if he chose sides. I know he didn't, but there will be people out that that see that as Obama siding, he should be trying to smooth over racial tensions. He should have talked less about trayvon and more about subsiding the tension.

Then again he is a #ty president so I wouldn't expect that.

In reality he was just exploiting the death of a kid to look good and empathetic. Votin' season is almost here.

reply to post by pizzanazi75


Absolutely, and that is not evidence you guys just think it is.

I am not trolling. Give me one shred of actual evidence. Real evidence. I am not so sure you can discern between real evidence and opinion.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75

 

Well it does because to a lot of people it is going to appear as if he chose sides. I know he didn't, but there will be people out that that see that as Obama siding, he should be trying to smooth over racial tensions. He should have talked less about trayvon and more about subsiding the tension.

Then again he is a #ty president so I wouldn't expect that.

In reality he was just exploiting the death of a kid to look good and empathetic. Votin' season is almost here.

There is you bias in this case again.

Hoe does Obamas opinion change anything that happened the night of Feb. 26 in Stanford, FL. Please explain.

Obama's opinion has no bearing on the situation at all.

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
reply to post by rebellender

 

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.

Getting away with a crime?
You can't put zimmerman on trial
because you THINK he did not
act in self defense. THERE HAS TO
BE EVIDENCE!!

Now any jury is tainted, and how nice
if it was an all black jury like OJ got,
what if OJ had an all white jury?

EVEN IF THEY DO CHARGE ZIMMERMAN
NO WAY HE IS A MURDERER NO WAY
it is first or seconds degree murder.
So people calling him a murderer is BS
maybe a moron but not a murderer.

reply to post by pizzanazi75


It doesn't, it adds to the bias against Zimmerman and makes it harder for him to get a fair trial if anyone charges him. That is how it bears on the case.

Seriously, I am done if you can't understand simple things like how the PRESIDENT speaking out on a subject that is a tenderbox and making a remark that could be seen and used as taking a side (even if he wasn't people can see things their own way) before the man was charged or tried and in the same breath call for an investigation that could put him on trial.

How does Zimmerman get a fair trial if the majority of people in the country feel like you do? Tell me that?

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75

 

Well it does because to a lot of people it is going to appear as if he chose sides. I know he didn't, but there will be people out that that see that as Obama siding, he should be trying to smooth over racial tensions. He should have talked less about trayvon and more about subsiding the tension.

Then again he is a #ty president so I wouldn't expect that.

In reality he was just exploiting the death of a kid to look good and empathetic. Votin' season is almost here.

i sure bet you wouldnt be singing the same song if obama spoke out in defense of zimmerman.
the best thing obama said was that we should all do some soulsearching and look within ourselves and ask how this could happen? notice how he didnt say white people, or black people, he said all people.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


It doesn't matter what we present you won't think its real evidence.

Can you explain to me how Zimmerman shot Treyvon with Treyvon on top of him, shot him in the chest. And on the police footage there appears to be no blood on Zimmermans clothing. How can you shoot someone that is on top of you and not get any blood on you?

That is evidence. So I have presented it, now you tell me how you think, based on video evidence, Zimmerman walked away from that shooting with no blood on his tshirt from the bullet hole he put in Treyvons chest?

reply to post by conspiracy nut


If Obama would have supported Zimmerman the would have imploded. They wouldn't know which side to jump on...the commie president or the thug black kid? that would have been overload for them.

reply to post by popsmayhem

You can't put zimmerman on trial because you THINK he did not act in self defense.

Oh, pops. So if a guy walks up to you and shoots you for no reason at all and screams self-defense, the cops shouldn't arrest him and he shouldn't have a trial simply because the cops don't think he was acting in self-defense? As much as you like to say it, this is NOT a clear-cut case of self defense. There is plenty of reason to doubt his story.

reply to post by conspiracy nut


I would absolutely! Man, I am done talking with you guys. You just came into the thread halfway and have no idea what you are talking about. I will also add, and for the last time, that I defended the teenager at first, I stand on the side of whichever is true. Go back to the first few pages of this thread and you can see where I defended TM for pages.

So yeah, I would be singing the same thing, the president should never appear to take a side when the country is at high tensions.