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

reply to post by rebellender


what does that even mean? you know i think we just think differently, we probably come from different backgrounds/ parts of the country. if you are for this sort of vigilantism go deputize yourself but remember even cops have rules they have to abide by, they cant go and shoot any tom, dick, or harry without a full investigation, things arent that cut and dry.

reply to post by Xtrozero


The only witness to the start of the conflict may end up being in Zimmerman favor. According to Trayvon's girl friend it started like this:

Trayvon saying 'What, are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What are you doing here.'

Not a lot to go off but IMO doesn't sound like Zimmerman hunting him like a dog.

reply to post by conspiracy nut

I think my posts speak my position over and over again.

you seem to want lynch mob justice. No its not different parts of the country, man, its mentality.

Your posts also speak for you....

I have to post responsibly. I owe that to my peers here on ATS.

reply to post by rebellender


no i am not for lynch mob mentality, i am for justice and not the kind of "sweep it under the rug, moving right along, nothing to see here folks" type justice that the SPD almost got away with. if that happened to my son you bet your life i would be demanding answers as well.

reply to post by conspiracy nut


where is sweeping justice under the rug with this now in the court system...Please please post in the now. Trail is a reality in the case on Zimmerman. please see at least that

Originally posted by rebellender
reply to post by conspiracy nut

 

where is sweeping justice under the rug with this now in the court system...Please please post in the now. Trail is a reality in the case on Zimmerman. please see at least that

first let me state that i respect your attitude of innocent until proven guilty, but when you stick up for zimmermans actions over and over again, you are no better than me. only a blind man can look at the evidence and not realize that zimmerman made several mistakes that eventually led to trayvons death. the things he did while carrying a firearm were completely irresponsible. again if you want to bust "bad guys", become a cop. having citizens taking the law into their own hands is no better than citizens snitching on each other in east germany or the communist ussr. that type of behaviour has to be frowned upon in our society.

reply to post by conspiracy nut

where the fault is in your position is where you think you know what happened so as to say my position is wrong.

you live in Florida do ya?. I did. back when they started changing the gun carry laws in the early '80's. It Helped save lives and cut down crime.

go take up residency in Florida and run and gain office. Look at the law from all sides.

In this case there are no answers. only Blind Justice will prevail. I am good with that

ARE YOU??

well we could wait til the verdict comes in but that would take all the fun out of sitting here debating you now wouldnt it? i cannot say that i would be happy with the verdict if he is found not guilty unless some other evidence in favor of zimmerman comes out. i mean the trial is in the same state that a woman could have her dead child in her trunk and not report the child missing for 31 days, and be left out on time served, i mean hell anything could happen.

reply to post by conspiracy nut

well there is your position.

and well spoken if you say so.

who can argue with you now?

reply to post by conspiracy nut


He may have made some brain dead mistakes, but did he break any laws? It isn't illegal to follow someone and ask them why they are in the neighborhood.

I don't think the State of Florida can prove that Zimmerman broke any laws before the physical altercation began, and the evidence of the physical altercation shows that Zimmerman was getting beat before shooting Trayvon.

Unless Zimmerman broke a law, he should be able to claim self defense under the "stand your ground" law.

Unless Mr. Z did the assault. If he even grapped T's arm he started it and that would mean any physical force necessary is legal to disarm the assailant. Including bashing his head to whatever is around untill he is disarmed and no longer a threat. SYG laws and all.

reply to post by PsykoOps


If that happened, sure. Why on earth are people thinking something like that happened, when there is zero evidence of it though? Since the beginning, when there was almost no evidence out there at all, that is what people were assuming. Why? Then as evidence and witnesses were heard, the goalposts were moved from "big bad bully executes a 12 year old for having some skittles" to where we are now.

For pages people were calling George a liar, trying to use that video that looks like it was taken with a calculator as proof that no altercation even happened...... Eye witnesses were called lairs and idiots, while ear witnesses were taken as gospel. Insanity.

Originally posted by kimish
TM noticed GZ creepin on him so than he ambushed GZ at the right moment to try to get the best of him. Just my .02

I guess the bottom line is whether Martin was just walking to a house in that area or actually casing the area. This would add some credence to Martine attacking as said, but if he was just traveling to a house...I have my doubts.

Originally posted by Logmafia
Trayvon saying 'What, are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What are you doing here.'

Not a lot to go off but IMO doesn't sound like Zimmerman hunting him like a dog.

Doesn't sound like a reason a savagely attack either....

I have 28 years of military experience on this, I own a lot of guns, and I would not hesitate to use one in the right conditions, not even a second of hesitation I can assure you....but having a gun in your pocket makes one really brave to say and do things well beyond what one would normally do.

No matter what anyone says I just cannot see this as Zimmerman fearing for his life and taking another life as a result....He put himself in harm's way at the least knowing he had the edge with his hidden gun, he instigate the whole situation, forced the interaction...and once again knowing he had his trusty gun in his pocket.

At some point to ALL Zimmerman's doing Martin was provoked enough to attack it seems, but once again Zimmerman always had that upper edge with his gun...

This would all be totally different if Martin came up to Zimmerman and instigated it all to have Zimmerman finally defend himself in the end, but that is not how it all went down ....


In the end Zimmerman might be innocent to FL law, but I guess the law didn't account for total stupidity.

And we still have a dead kid that was walking to his father's apartment as his crime....

we have to remember that when somebody commits a crime...judgement gets passed by the community, thats what we have done here, but when the perp goes to trial we have to check our moral feelings at the door of justice. we cannot blind the letter of the law with moral feelings because we all see things as individuals, this is part of how humanity works.

we do see things differently

so, by checking our feelings at the door, the letter of the law can then judge the individual charged of the crime....

this is why there is argument on this thread

Originally posted by Xtrozero


And we still have a dead kid that was walking to his father's apartment as his crime....

That is a logical fallacy, had Trayvon survived he could have been charged with battery.

Zimmerman shooting Trayvon was a tragedy, I hope that someday some good will come out of it.

Originally posted by Xtrozero
True, but anything less than the way I suggested in a senerio I don't see deadly force justified.

This sentence above sums up the issues people have when it comes to reviewing a situation where a serious physical injury / death occurs, whether or not its by law enforcement or a civilian (btw not singling you out or anything.. You just happened to phrase the setence in a perfect manner to address the issue - no offense).

There is a reason why the US Supreme Court ruled in the manner it did when it comes to the use of deadly force. For Law Enforcement the standard is what did the officer perceive at the exact moment force was used. For civilians its what would a reasonable person believe.

In order to answer those questions the person being asked must be restricted to the events of the night without the benefeit of 20/20 hindsight. We look at the situation now and read about it and have facts that neither Martin nor Zimmerman had that night. When looking at the force used a person must view that portion of the encounter with the exact same information Zimmerman / Martin had when it occured.

It does not matter if Zimmerman had a troubled past or that Martin played football and had a troubled past. None of those facts where known to the other at the time the confrontation started.

In terms of the rationality for the level of force used you need to throw everything you know out the window. In order to understand why an action occured you have to view it as it occured.

If you were walking through a neighborhood and noticed an individual following you, you start to become defensive. Your sense are heightened (fight or flight response / adrenaline). Maybe not full blast at first but the body is going through physical / checmical changes.

The same goes for Zimmerman.. He spots someone he does not recognize and who looks suspicious. His body goes through similar changes as Martin did.

The determination on the reasonableness and justification of use of force is restricted to the facts at the moment it occured and how those facts fit in with Floridas SYG law or their independent self defense law.

I can't state this enough - If people want to try an understand how Zimmerman / Martin arrived at their conclusions, forget all the info you have read and view it through their eyes. Which is to say you know nothing about each other or their intent.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
I can't state this enough - If people want to try an understand how Zimmerman / Martin arrived at their conclusions, forget all the info you have read and view it through their eyes. Which is to say you know nothing about each other or their intent.

I agree, but when one carries a deadly weapon one has to be responsible. Zimmerman basically created the altercation knowing he was armed and had the advantage, and he used that advantage. Like it or not Zimmerman created the whole situation, and like it or not that just might be fine within the FL law.

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
you are aware that you are exaggerating right? what you guys want is to be able to shoot and kill any unarmed person that can kick your butts fair and square, even if you start the fight.

You do realize he is correct and not exaggerating right?

To break a person neck - Approximately 40 pounds of force +/-
To crush a person adams apple and restrict air flow - Approximately 8 pounds of force +/-
To crush a persons trachea - Approximately 140 pounds of force +/-

A strong enough punch to a person nose can force the ethmoid bone into the brain cavity, resulting in death.
A strong enough punch to a persons temple can cause bleeding in the brain resulting in death.
A strong enough punch to a persons temple can result in a fatal fracture, penetrating the brain.


A TEENAGER who killed a young man with one punch to the head has been sentenced to periodic detention for manslaughter.

Police: Man killed with one punch at Las Vegas casino

Read more: www.azcentral.com...

Man Kills Victim with One Punch- 1892

Teen guilty over 'one-punch' death

These are just a few facts for you to consider....

Originally posted by Logmafia

That is a logical fallacy, had Trayvon survived he could have been charged with battery.

Zimmerman shooting Trayvon was a tragedy, I hope that someday some good will come out of it.

Could Martin have thought he was under attack and defended himself? I guess we will never know since Zimmerman is the one witness to it all.