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

Originally posted by cyb3rR3v0luti0nary
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

Unless it's between people that are actually trained fighters, most of the time its the guy who starts it, AKA suckerpunch, that gets the upper hand and wins. Also, if zimmerman started it, a big guy like that punches you in the face, there would be some physical indication of that.

Again, this is rubbish. I really wish people wouldn't pull things out of the air.


Trained fighter or not, it makes no difference. In fact, its more likely that untrained fighters would scuffles around and around on the floor as opposed to TRAINED fighters who are able to have far greater control of that.

Anyone who has taken any class of mixed martial arts (which is the general training of what might be deemed a 'trained fighter') would know that one of the first things you learn is to 'take it to the ground to control it'). Trained fighters don't roll around.

And more assumption of how the fight started. If you guys can't use the information available to make a point, what's the point of even looking for information? Now you are speculating on how Zimmerman started the fight based on his size?? Really? All big people start fights with a solid punch right?

Originally posted by TKDRL
Dude was in a car at the beginning of it. If he was hard up to kill somebody, it woulda been way easier to run him over and claim it was an accident. Well, was fun chatting, gotta run.

edit on Sun, 08 Apr 2012 19:01:07 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

If you gotta run. Run.

I think most reasonable people here understand the basic concept that this was not a planned murder. No one is suggesting this. Except you.

reply to post by spacedog1973


At what point do you have to wait to defend yourself? If a guy is on top of you beating you, showing no sign of letting up, you are not gonna defend yourself by any means necessary? I would. I would be reaching for my trusty sheathe knife and opening someone up. No way I am gonna let some guy beat me into a coma or worse.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

Eye witness account showing trayvon on top doing the beating, VS speculation that zimmerman attacked him first..... If zimmerman did the attacking first, trayvon would have to have gotten really lucky to turn the tables on a bigger guy.

Treyvon ran, which is why zimmerman had to get out
the suv cant go down sidewalks and cut throughs,
how could zimmerman of caught up to him at this point?
How exactly did a small 130lb kid unarmed guy
take down and get on top of the 250lb armed man?
How would you do it/???

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

Eye witness account showing trayvon on top doing the beating, VS speculation that zimmerman attacked him first..... If zimmerman did the attacking first, trayvon would have to have gotten really lucky to turn the tables on a bigger guy.

Treyvon ran, which is why zimmerman had to get out
the suv cant go down sidewalks and cut throughs,
how could zimmerman of caught up to him at this point?
How exactly did a small 130lb kid unarmed
take down and get on top of the 250lb armed man?
How would you do it/???

edit on 8-4-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)

Its seems logical to suggest that they were rolling around on the ground.

Originally posted by cyb3rR3v0luti0nary
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

At what point do you have to wait to defend yourself? If a guy is on top of you beating you, showing no sign of letting up, you are not gonna defend yourself by any means necessary? I would. I would be reaching for my trusty sheathe knife and opening someone up. No way I am gonna let some guy beat me into a coma or worse.

Well I just hope no one picks a fight with you and you decide to kill them with your 'trusty sheathe knife' when you start losing.

The law is quite clear as to when you defend yourself. You can defend yourself whenever you please. But is has to be proportional to the threat.

What you are implying is when does the law allow you to kill. At what point can you kill when in a confrontation.
Its when you fear for you life. Because to take a life, you have to have a proportional threat to take it.

That's the whole point of this. Is there sufficient evidence to support that Zimmerman could feel in fear for his life? Having a boy on top of you is not sufficient reason in an of itself. Especially an unarmed teen. Who we agree weighed substantially less than him.

Physical evidence would suggest that the fear that zimmerman claims was in his mind only.

reply to post by spacedog1973


Where else is his fear gonna reside? All fear is inside your head...... Having an unknown assailant on top of you beating you up is probably scary. How could he even know he was not armed. I wouldn't take the chance myself. Rather be judged, than buried myself.

Glad to see you changed what you wrote to me before lol. I was like what it makes no sense

Originally posted by spacedog1973

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by GhettoRice

 

Do you dispute that Zimmerman was on bottom? That is the most important aspect. If he saw Zimmerman on bottom then even people against Zimmerman have to concede that Zimmerman was justified.

I think is where you misunderstand something very basic.
If you dont understand who started a confrontation, you don't understand who is on the defense and who has the right to defense.

The law doesnt state that if you start losing a fight, you have the right to kill someone.

So, no. This is not the most important aspect by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, it is not relevant as to whether someone has the right to kill someone. This is what you misunderstand. Its very simple.

Thx for understanding, you got my point exactly.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

Where else is his fear gonna reside? All fear is inside your head...... Having an unknown assailant on top of you beating you up is probably scary. How could he even know he was not armed. I wouldn't take the chance myself. Rather be judged, than buried myself.

Fear can be evidenced. You can be fearful of a bear chasing you, of a gun pulled on you etc. When there is no evidence of this fear, then it resides in your mind. When fear resides in your mind, it is subjective and will differ depending on the individual.

One person might be in fear of his life if a large muscular man sneer at him. Someone might be in fear for his life if a car revved its motor when they are crossing in front of it. Someone might fear for their life for all manner of reasons.

A jury should decide on what is acceptable and proportional. You feelings have no baring on this. Just because it seems you have never been in a fight before, doesn't mean you have a right to kill someone because you hate physical contact which is a natural part of any fight.

Cowardice is not an excuse to kill people. And just because some here feel that killing people is more easier than facing their fears, doesn't mean society should accept it.

reply to post by spacedog1973


He only knows what was going on in his head, no one can disprove he feared for his life. He allegedly had a guy on top of him beating him up, that's not a fight, it is an assault. Fight or flight kicked in I am sure, and he did what he thought he had to do to survive.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75

 

I know exactly which witness it is. She has been seen without her face covered as in the link you posted. She didn't see the struggle she didn't know which was on top and which was on bottom.

"I know it was very dark, but I really would have to say that I think it was the larger man that was on the top"

Sounds like she is really sure. The other witness was definite.

No the other witness was not definite ..... you need to listen to 'johns' 911 call and then listen to his doorway interview....his 911 call contradicts his doorway interview....the AC360 witness has been consistent the entire time.....You choose to believe 'John'...I will choose to believe the other witness. I believe her to be way more credible than 'John'....John supposedly ran in fear in his house and locked the door, remember?.....I don't think John knows what he saw, he was in too much shock....I think John was TOLD what he saw ...like has been reported by several witness....one of which is mentioned in this clip..

EPIC FAIL by Police in Trayvon Martin Investigation

reply to post by spacedog1973


I have been in plenty of fights actually, just never had someone on top of me throwing punches. I guess I was lucky, every fight I been in there was no cheap stuff like that. Always people around to break it up if things got too out of hand.

reply to post by pizzanazi75


That witness saw nothing, just heard them and made assumptions on who was whose voice. The guy who actually saw it happen said it was zimmerman calling for help.

Originally posted by cyb3rR3v0luti0nary
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

He only knows what was going on in his head, no one can disprove he feared for his life. He allegedly had a guy on top of him beating him up, that's not a fight, it is an assault. Fight or flight kicked in I am sure, and he did what he thought he had to do to survive.

The point is, if he can't demonstrate that he was in fear for his life by way of a proof, i,e a gun or knife or bear chasing him, then he will need to reason as to his level of fear. Its either one or the other. Thats why his defense suggested that he was jumped by TM at his car. Which is patently untrue given the location of his car and TM's body.

And it does't matter if he feared for his life or not. It has to be proportional to the perceived threat. You can't go shooting at a revving car because you think it might run you down and kill you. Thats the point. You have to justify your fears and they have to be proportional to your action.

Again, your argument doesn't make sense Because 'fight or flight' is implausible given that he had followed TM. You can't have flight when you are the pursuer. You can't have flight when you report TM as running.

Again, if you feel that you need to 'survive' then you need evidence of this, which so far he hasn't provided, nor have witnesses.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75

 

If you have a shoulder holster and you have your jacket open, it is still legally concealed. If you have it tucked into the back of your pants it is still legally concealed.

And do you know exactly what Zimmerman did that night with his gun? You are assuming a lot.

You don't know what Zimmerman did in regards to making sure his weapon was concealed that night...im betting he did all he could to make Trayvon AWARE he had that gun. Men who need to chase unarmed teenagers are tough by nature, they are tough because they have a gun. Zimmerman wanted Trayvon to know he had that gun, imo. That fits with Zimmermans past aggressive-wanna-be-cop- mentality.

Originally posted by cyb3rR3v0luti0nary
reply to post by spacedog1973

 

I have been in plenty of fights actually, just never had someone on top of me throwing punches. I guess I was lucky, every fight I been in there was no cheap stuff like that. Always people around to break it up if things got too out of hand.

Its not cheap stuff, its what fights usually devolve to. Fights don't happen like in the movies, people slugging it out one on one.

reply to post by spacedog1973


I think you need to learn how the justice system works. He does not need to prove he feared for his life, the prosecution, if there is even a trial need to prove he did not. Innocent until proven guilty in the court of law in this country.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by pizzanazi75

 

That eyewitness did not actually see the fight start though.
They heard it and saw part of the end (which she started claiming later, I don't think she claimed to see it at first). Also she doesn't sound at all like she knows what she apparently saw. She uses words like think and blah blah. She would be worthless in court.
I didn't think Zimmerman's voice was deep at all from the call.
Either way this person claiming to be an eyewitness did not see the fight start or the struggle they just heard the ordeal and saw the end saying it was very dark and she thought it was the larger man (obviously not sure as the other witness was). They didn't even hear what was being said, they can't confirm anything.

The other witness describes what the person underneath was wearing. That is what I am going to go with.

edit on 8-4-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

Like I said before, I don't think John knows what he saw either. He was to concerned about getting in his house and saving his own butt to even go and try to assist....i don't think he stuck around long enough to see anything in the dark. I think he was TOLD what to say. His doorway interview contradicts his 911, that is why I believe he was given information after the fact and he added that information to fit what he was TOLD he saw.

I have no problem believing the AC360 witness, she seems honest. Admits when she saw or heard something, and admits when she didn't.

And to point out .... NO ONE saw the beginning....

reply to post by spacedog1973


Around here you get made fun of as a sissy if you try that wrestling around stuff. And hitting while someone is down is frowned upon, if there are bystanders, they will intervene at that point.

Originally posted by cyb3rR3v0luti0nary
reply to post by pizzanazi75

 

That witness saw nothing, just heard them and made assumptions on who was whose voice. The guy who actually saw it happen said it was zimmerman calling for help.

edit on 8-4-2012 by cyb3rR3v0luti0nary because: (no reason given)

By all accounts it was DARK. John ran in his house, locked his door and ran up stairs. Please tell me how in the DARK during a 2 man scuffle could John tell it was Zimmerman yelling for help? Science has said it wasn't Zimmerman yelling.

Did John know Zimmerman previously from the nieghborhood? If he didn't explain how in the DARK he knew it was Zimmerman?