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: 240
105
<< 237  238  239    241  242  243 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Can I say "SELECTIVENESS"?


I'll allow it.

Why what do you mean?
edit on 12-4-2012 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
Florida investigators say in an affidavit that George Zimmerman profiled, confronted, then fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

Florida investigators say in an affidavit that George Zimmerman profiled, confronted, then fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

The link goes to cnn you can click to get the pdf



What else would the prosecuter say?

That does not mean thats what happen...

Thats there offense



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
Florida investigators say in an affidavit that George Zimmerman profiled, confronted, then fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

Florida investigators say in an affidavit that George Zimmerman profiled, confronted, then fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

The link goes to cnn you can click to get the pdf



What else would the prosecuter say?

That does not mean thats what happen...

Thats there offense


Did you read it? It's not the prosecutors words, its the words of the investigtors as to why they brought charges.

So if you admit this report means nothing, I guess you will admit the original police report that claims bloody nose and head and yelling for help also means nothing.....right? I mean you can't have it all ways.


edit on 12-4-2012 by pizzanazi75 because: (no reason given)


I edited this earlier and pasted something not directed at you pops, if you read it, sorry. I don't know how it happened, but i removed it because it was in response to another thread post.
edit on 12-4-2012 by pizzanazi75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
Florida investigators say in an affidavit that George Zimmerman profiled, confronted, then fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

Florida investigators say in an affidavit that George Zimmerman profiled, confronted, then fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

The link goes to cnn you can click to get the pdf



What else would the prosecuter say?

That does not mean thats what happen...

Thats there offense


Did you read it? It's not the prosecutors words, its the words of the investigtors as to why they brought charges.

So if you admit this report means nothing, I guess you will admit the original police report that claims bloody nose and head and yelling for help also means nothing.....right? I mean you can't have it all ways.


edit on 12-4-2012 by pizzanazi75 because: (no reason given)


I edited this earlier and pasted something not directed at you pops, if you read it, sorry. I don't know how it happened, but i removed it because it was in response to another thread post.
edit on 12-4-2012 by pizzanazi75 because: (no reason given)


Of course its the words of the prosecutor she was the investigator. People really dont understand law and i noticed this during this mess. The state has to make charges against him or he would not be on trial. This is nothing like a police report. A police report is nothing but officer statements of the facts as they believed at the time. The affidavit is the states story on what they believe happened and then attempt to prove in court entirely different.
edit on 4/12/12 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
Florida investigators say in an affidavit that George Zimmerman profiled, confronted, then fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

Florida investigators say in an affidavit that George Zimmerman profiled, confronted, then fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

The link goes to cnn you can click to get the pdf



What else would the prosecuter say?

That does not mean thats what happen...

Thats there offense


Did you read it? It's not the prosecutors words, its the words of the investigtors as to why they brought charges.

So if you admit this report means nothing, I guess you will admit the original police report that claims bloody nose and head and yelling for help also means nothing.....right? I mean you can't have it all ways.


edit on 12-4-2012 by pizzanazi75 because: (no reason given)


I edited this earlier and pasted something not directed at you pops, if you read it, sorry. I don't know how it happened, but i removed it because it was in response to another thread post.
edit on 12-4-2012 by pizzanazi75 because: (no reason given)


Of course its the words of the prosecutor she was the investigator. People really dont understand law and i noticed this during this mess. The state has to make charges against him or he would not be on trial. This is nothing like a police report. A police report is nothing but officer statements of the facts as they believed at the time. The affidavit is the states story on what they believe happened and then attempt to prove in court entirely different.
edit on 4/12/12 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)


It is not entirely different. Had the original Prosecutor brought up charges like was recommended to her by the lead investigator the night of the murder, the case still would have been based on the police report and the investigation done by the lead investigator. This is no different. This is just different investigators brought in by the state. But they used the same information that the original investigators and police had and wanted to charge him with that night. Exact same thing.

It seems the only people who didn't want to charge him the night of the murder was the chief of police and the State Attorney Wolfinger. Curious. It seems every other investigator who looks at the evidence see probable cause to charge Zimmerman with a crime, in this case 2nd degree murder.
edit on 12-4-2012 by pizzanazi75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Ok ill make this simple i get you didnt go to law school. Now the affidavit that was filed is called an affidavit of probable cause. Now in this the investigator is Angela Corey shes the states attorney. Ostien and Gilbreth the people that presented it to the states attorney for deposition work for her.There statement will be whatever she decides its going to be its her show. All this affidavit does is tell you what the state will try to prove happened.This however does not mean that is what happened a jury will decide that. Does that clear up your confusion?



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Ok ill make this simple i get you didnt go to law school. Now the affidavit that was filed is called an affidavit of probable cause. Now in this the investigator is Angela Corey shes the states attorney. Ostien and Gilbreth the people that presented it to the states attorney for deposition work for her.There statement will be whatever she decides its going to be its her show. All this affidavit does is tell you what the state will try to prove happened.This however does not mean that is what happened a jury will decide that. Does that clear up your confusion?


Ill make it simple, im not confused about anything. These investigators came to the same conclusion the lead investigator that night came up with. There statement is based on the information gathered. Unless you dispute there statements. like I said before, they had the same information the original investigators had, and they came to the same conclusion, there is probable cause to show a crime was committed. You can try and spin it anyway you want and try to belittle me in the process but that won't change a thing.

On a side note.....I just love how people get so defensive when anyone makes any sort of comment on an internet discussion board. I guess they enjoy one sided conversations only. Thats when the superiority complexes start to come out with statements like 'ill make it simple', 'i get you didn't go to law school', 'does that clear up the confusion'.......



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Ok ill make this simple i get you didnt go to law school. Now the affidavit that was filed is called an affidavit of probable cause. Now in this the investigator is Angela Corey shes the states attorney. Ostien and Gilbreth the people that presented it to the states attorney for deposition work for her.There statement will be whatever she decides its going to be its her show. All this affidavit does is tell you what the state will try to prove happened.This however does not mean that is what happened a jury will decide that. Does that clear up your confusion?


Ill make it simple, im not confused about anything. These investigators came to the same conclusion the lead investigator that night came up with. There statement is based on the information gathered. Unless you dispute there statements. like I said before, they had the same information the original investigators had, and they came to the same conclusion, there is probable cause to show a crime was committed. You can try and spin it anyway you want and try to belittle me in the process but that won't change a thing.

On a side note.....I just love how people get so defensive when anyone makes any sort of comment on an internet discussion board. I guess they enjoy one sided conversations only. Thats when the superiority complexes start to come out with statements like 'ill make it simple', 'i get you didn't go to law school', 'does that clear up the confusion'.......


Well your obviously not getting it the affidavit is nothing more then a timeline and its extremely general have you read it i have. It doesnt make accusations on anything it simply states what the prosecutor the states attorneys office will try to prove happened that night,That doesn't mean they can prove it. Charges cannot be filled against someone unless some one presses charges and that's all this document does.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Ok ill make this simple i get you didnt go to law school. Now the affidavit that was filed is called an affidavit of probable cause. Now in this the investigator is Angela Corey shes the states attorney. Ostien and Gilbreth the people that presented it to the states attorney for deposition work for her.There statement will be whatever she decides its going to be its her show. All this affidavit does is tell you what the state will try to prove happened.This however does not mean that is what happened a jury will decide that. Does that clear up your confusion?


Ill make it simple, im not confused about anything. These investigators came to the same conclusion the lead investigator that night came up with. There statement is based on the information gathered. Unless you dispute there statements. like I said before, they had the same information the original investigators had, and they came to the same conclusion, there is probable cause to show a crime was committed. You can try and spin it anyway you want and try to belittle me in the process but that won't change a thing.

On a side note.....I just love how people get so defensive when anyone makes any sort of comment on an internet discussion board. I guess they enjoy one sided conversations only. Thats when the superiority complexes start to come out with statements like 'ill make it simple', 'i get you didn't go to law school', 'does that clear up the confusion'.......


Well your obviously not getting it the affidavit is nothing more then a timeline and its extremely general have you read it i have. It doesnt make accusations on anything it simply states what the prosecutor the states attorneys office will try to prove happened that night,That doesn't mean they can prove it. Charges cannot be filled against someone unless some one presses charges and that's all this document does.


I get it just fine. Again, you saying Im 'obviously not getting it' means nothing, except you want to some how feel superior. If you need to feel that way its ok. I understand what I am talking about I don't need you to validate my views to know that I understand what is going on.



posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Originally posted by dragonridr

Originally posted by pizzanazi75

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


Ok ill make this simple i get you didnt go to law school. Now the affidavit that was filed is called an affidavit of probable cause. Now in this the investigator is Angela Corey shes the states attorney. Ostien and Gilbreth the people that presented it to the states attorney for deposition work for her.There statement will be whatever she decides its going to be its her show. All this affidavit does is tell you what the state will try to prove happened.This however does not mean that is what happened a jury will decide that. Does that clear up your confusion?


Ill make it simple, im not confused about anything. These investigators came to the same conclusion the lead investigator that night came up with. There statement is based on the information gathered. Unless you dispute there statements. like I said before, they had the same information the original investigators had, and they came to the same conclusion, there is probable cause to show a crime was committed. You can try and spin it anyway you want and try to belittle me in the process but that won't change a thing.

On a side note.....I just love how people get so defensive when anyone makes any sort of comment on an internet discussion board. I guess they enjoy one sided conversations only. Thats when the superiority complexes start to come out with statements like 'ill make it simple', 'i get you didn't go to law school', 'does that clear up the confusion'.......


Well your obviously not getting it the affidavit is nothing more then a timeline and its extremely general have you read it i have. It doesnt make accusations on anything it simply states what the prosecutor the states attorneys office will try to prove happened that night,That doesn't mean they can prove it. Charges cannot be filled against someone unless some one presses charges and that's all this document does.


I get it just fine. Again, you saying Im 'obviously not getting it' means nothing, except you want to some how feel superior. If you need to feel that way its ok. I understand what I am talking about I don't need you to validate my views to know that I understand what is going on.


why argue about it people!!



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 02:09 AM
link   
2nd degree murder - they better have some hot evidence or Zimmerman will walk.



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by pizzanazi75
 


its also strange how the lead investigator recommended a manslughter charge but this prosecutor has went for 2nd degree murder. Seems to be for political reasons.

Also with things like " disobeyed a dispatchers order" and " trayvons mum says the screams were trayvon" as part of their case it doesnt seem very strong. More like parroting al sharptons talking points.


edit on 13-4-2012 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 


Not necessarily. The jury can still find him guilty of manslaughter even though the charge is 2nd degree murder, without a whole new trial.



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   
This is just people who are taking Zims side and giving him the benefit of doubt cause they are the same skin color and own guns. They are scared gun laws will tighten up over this. But anyone with 2 eyes can see something was VERY fishy about this whole thing and the way Zimmerman was treated with kid gloves that night.

His pictures have not yet shown a sign of a broken nose. The shooter was not drug tested but the victim is. This just makes zero sense and the ones who cant see this are biased for whatever reason.

The good thing is this thread will be here after the trial and PLEASE Zim supporters i wont no back pedaling from you guys when the evidence comes out he was in the wrong.

You stick by your hero and stick by your true colors once the evidence nails this chump. Your past ignorant posts will be thrown in your face cause ill be sure to stop by and serve a HUGE dish of crow for you guys and you need to man up and admit you were wrong when this happens.

These assholes always get away, yep Zimmerman you almost got away but not quite yet.
edit on 13-4-2012 by Deranged74 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-4-2012 by Deranged74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Deranged74
 



His pictures have not yet shown a sign of a broken nose




i wont no back pedaling from you guys when the evidence comes out


zimmermans ex-lawyers were on tv and confirmed he had a broken nose and it was still broken 3 weeks after the event. I'm sure you will see the x-rays in the trial. Do you want to back peddle now or later?



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 


Ill be here when he is convicted of a crime will you be?

Glad my hero isnt a weak coward thats all im saying



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Since no one knows the FACTS but instead only know the media spin and hype ... why not wait until the trial when the truth comes out? It seems pretty dang silly to be engaged in a pro-____ (fill in name) or anti-______ (fill in name) war when you just don't know the truth. How about being pro-truth and pro-justice ... doesn't that sound like something a reasonable minded adult would do? Be pro-truth and pro-justice and see what undisputed FACTS the professionals in Florida come up with in this matter.

Oh .. what a novel idea!



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 08:20 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


A in shape 28 y/o yes look at him recently he isnt fat or out of shape shot and killed a unarmed 17 y/o who was a beanpole.

Thats all the facts i really need.

Unless their is video or proof Zimmerman was being beat to death or Martin was armed which i have seen no injurys or evidence to support a near death beating or armed Martin i will stick by my opinion.

In order for Zimmermen to get my vote he needs to show some serious injurys and not little scraps.

lets see if he can do it
edit on 13-4-2012 by Deranged74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Deranged74
 


i'm a neutral observer and have said before there isn't enough evidence in the public domain to come to a conclusion about this case.

i fear he cant get a fair trial becuase of the campaign against him but we will see what happens.



posted on Apr, 13 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 


he can get a fair trial if thats what you wanna call it. casey anthony was all but hung by the public and media and still got a "fair" trial & got off with time served.




top topics



 
105
<< 237  238  239    241  242  243 >>

log in

join