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

reply to post by PLASIFISK


Have you seen any evidence of that? I have not heard of anything, like ripped shirt etc.

Originally posted by RealSpoke
Too bad Trayvon was too young to have a gun. If some creepy guy was following me at age 17, I'd be thinking he was a Jefferey Dahmer type. Who follows people? Rapists, Murderers, and Robbers.......

True.
Also concerned citizens, private detectives and cops. Just rounding out the list.

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
reply to post by butcherguy

 

i believe this info may have come out after the fact. we will not get to see the discovery and i am sure there is a ton of evidence in it that we do not know about.

I am not sure.
There very well may be, but i do not see any reason to be sure about it.

reply to post by TKDRL


Lol.

Again, your assuming that if zimmerman started the fight he would have hit trayvon in the face.

As if thats the only way to physically start a fight.

How about kicking a knee in, orrrr an elbow to the nose or temple. Many many other ways to do a show stopper if starting a fight.

How about kicking a knee in, orrrr an elbow to the nose or temple. Many many other ways to do a show stopper if starting a fight.

reply to post by PLASIFISK

In that case, Trayvon should have bruising, abrasions and or contusions to those areas.

According to the ME, that is not the case.

reply to post by PLASIFISK


I am assuming that starting a fight, is physically assaulting another person, and there would be signs of that if it happened. Given the mediadriven circus surrounding the case, if there was any sign, it would be front page headline news....

reply to post by TKDRL


I just made an assumtion, thats all.

You assume tray would have marks on his face if zim started the fight. Assuming zims first strike would have been to trays face. Im assuming first contact would have been grabing trays shirt since tray didnt have bruises to his face.

We both are making assumptions here.

reply to post by butcherguy


I was saying there are other ways to start a fight besides punching a face.

reply to post by TKDRL


Ok. So lets say someone swings on you. You go defensive, block it, get inside, lock the arm then place a good thumb into the wind pipe, then finish off with a head butt to the bridge of the nose.


Did you start the fight, or did the person throwing the punch start the fight?

Lol...... Lets not forget the kick to the inside knee to finish things off. Or a you knee to their grown, the knee to lower jaw. Have to leave them something to remember ya know!

reply to post by PLASIFISK


Was tray trained in a martial art? Known for being a great fighter? I would believe something like that was more probable if so. People who don't train are usually slow as hell, they don't have the muscle memory reflexes that those of us that train regularly have. Watching two untrained people fight is hilarious. Defending myself from someone that isn't trained used to be mildly amusing when I was young and dumb. Those roundhouse, wild gorilla punches untrained people generally use, I can hit two straight jabs to the chin before it comes close enough to contact.

reply to post by TKDRL


I agree it is hilarious and a total waste of energy and time on their parts. Lol

Again, i was only saying my opinion that fights are not only started by a punch to the face.

Also, just because tray didnt have bruises on his face doesnt mean he started the fight.

Thats just crazy talk.

Originally posted by PLASIFISK
reply to post by ludwigvonmises003

 

How was he a "gangster wannabe" ?

He had skittles and a ice tea.

Lol now had he had a ak-47, and was rolling diwn the street in a blacked out box chevy, with dark shades on, sime kind of bandana on his head. Bumping NWA, drinking a 40oz, of colt 45........

Then maybe i woyld say wanna be gangsta.


Ice tea and skittles?

Whar part of the world is that considered gangta??? Lol

Gold teeth's, Tattoos, suspended several times from school at age of 17, showing gang related signs on his tweeter account, HE INDEED WAS a Wannabe Ganster........and died because of that.

Skittles and Ice Tea = All criminal have a sweet tooth also, in Trayvon's case he still had a few real tooths left for his sweet tooth ...............He Dead MOVE ON. Less trouble for her mother. She didnt wanted Trayvon in her house after the last suspension I wonder why????...........Good kid my a s $

Originally posted by RealSpoke
Too bad Trayvon was too young to have a gun. If some creepy guy was following me at age 17, I'd be thinking he was a Jefferey Dahmer type. Who follows people? Rapists, Murderers, and Robbers.......

Yep, when I had to literally explain to someone why Trayvon wasn't "wrong" for running after seeing this unknown stalker, I almost gave up on this thread...

There is still a whole TROVE of evidence that has yet to be seen by the public. Not sure who leaked Zimmerman's medical records, but it should be noted that the very MSM everyone is cursing and scathing is quick to report on this too.

I plan to not get lead like a sheep for the second time and will wait for ALL of the facts come out. Peace!

Originally posted by PLASIFISK
reply to post by cdesigns

 

Soooo your saying because of crime going on down there, zimmerman had every right to detain trayvon.

Welp i carry concealed ( legally ). Never thought i would have to carry to my mailbox but i feel i have to now.

Because if im walking to my mailbox, and some one wants to stop and detain me because they think i look suspicous. There is going to be a problem. I have the right to walk through my neighborhood without being stopped and harrased. You bet your azz there would be a fight if i was trying to be detained. And you bet your azz i will not be unarmed should said aggressor begin to lose the fight or bite off more than he/she can chew and decide to use said fire arm.

I wont be zimmerman'd!

Nope not this guy.

I cant help that there is crime where i live.

I cant help that some of the people causing these crimes are brown skinned.

I will not be targeted though.

Lol, they better have their A game in full motion.

Trayvon looked suspicious and IT DIDN'T LIVED THERE only his father did. Zimmerman saw a suspicious person who he had not seen before walking behind the complex, why trayvon was behind the complex? there is NO place to hide from the rain there, why he didnt walk in front of the complex towards his father condominium door? he was walking behind the condos for no reason, when it was raining and dark. That's what Zimmerman saw and called the police.

This case is close already, everything we are seen is for show only, they need to calm the mob, nobody wants to be mix up with a racism case, if they need to hang someone innocent to look good , Zimmerman will be that person, but the evidence speaks for itself.

reply to post by butcherguy


no concerned citizens dont follow people around thats crazy, a concerned citizen will call 911. an over zealous wannabe cop packin heat will follow people around though. take away the gun and i wonder if zimmerman has the cojones to go follow people around?

reply to post by TKDRL


that is a different story than what i heard, i thought zimmerman confronted trayvon and said what are you doing here? perhaps zimmermans father changed his story for hannity?

Originally posted by Autumnal
From following what they did and watching them do some of it on video. From probably being closer to actually being a cop than you.

"So you just shot that kid laying in the grass? Here, clean yourself up and hop in the car so we can casually let you wander around unrestrained until we find out if you are a murderer or not."

edit on 16-5-2012 by Autumnal because: (no reason given)

So its your opinion then, based on what you have seen, that police did something wrong and there is no offical document / news article that actually supports your position that you can link to?

ok....

The reason I am asking as well as providing people with the statutes is so they can see that under Florida law a person cannot be arrested / charged with a crime if the person in question did not violate the law.

It was stated by the PA as well as the Police and the City of Sanford (general manager addressed questions that were constantly asked that procedure was followed and the police could not lawfully make an arrest. If the police cannot make an arrest, the normal procedures for evidence / questioning / etc are a moot point).

reply to post by cdesigns


Stereotype much?

Lol

Another reason i carry a gun, for people like you. Who just might be stupid enough to try and a pull a zimmerman.

Tisk tisk.

Originally posted by Autumnal
Go back and read my post again. Take out the part about the girlfriend's phone call altogether if it is so distracting that you could actually read the point of the entire post. Sorry for that part of that sentence. Now go back and see if you can respond to my post with the same arrogance.

I read your post and I was pointing out that all she can state is she was on the phone with Martin and that Martin noticed someone was following him. I have pointed out numerous other times that she cannot testify to what actually happened. I stated that because it was her opinion based on what she "heard" that Zimmerman attacked Martin. I pointed that out because you and a few others dont seem to understand the issues regarding her statements.

Her statement is not supported in terms of her actually witnessing it which means she cannot state in court who attacked who.

As far as the first part of your post it was irrelevent to the part I pointed out and explained / corrected.

Originally posted by Autumnal
Now go back and see if you can respond to my post with the same arrogance.

Its not arrogance... its me educating by providing information people don't know about or understand. If you disagree thats fine. All I ask is you provide a source / links to support your position so I can read the info. New info may have come out that I have missed.

If people weren't so focused on being defensive they might have taken the post in the correct context.

Originally posted by Autumnal
I am fairly certain there is a reason you avoided the entire point just to address one part of one sentence that was obviously not really relevant to the point of the thread one way or the other since it stands with or without it.

Because the issue I addressed, your comment about the gf, has absolutely nothing to with who attacked who first. I am pointing out she cant state who attacked who so that entire thought process by people who think her testimony is a smoking gun need to rethink that.

That goes back to the links to Florida law so people can research and understand why, on their own for personal growth, something that seems so relevent in actuality is irrelevant.