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

reply to post by dragonridr


First off, no my facts are not wrong. You need to take a look at the crime scene photos again. TM's body was 2 townhouse down from the 't' in the sidewalk. That is the same 'T' the GZ dad said he was knocked to the ground and TM got on top of him and started beating him and bashing his head in the sidewalk. Now, are you also calling GZ father a liar? See what you are doing is trying to make the EVIDENCE match what you want it to. Not what has actually been reported. You, like pops, are stuck on some fantasy that did not happen.

I didn't say his body was 30 from the back of a town house, I said it was 30 feet or so from the 'T'...so don't try to put words in my mouth to try and prove me wrong, when you can't even put the words in my mouth right. You need to look at this pic and tell me again TM's body isn't at least 30 feet from the 'T' and then tell me again how GZ father isn't a liar ....remember Daddy Z was at the re-enactment the next day. Once again you are wrong.
TM body




No, the eye witness reports are not consistent with GZ story. If it was he wouldn't have been arrested. And you just prove you haven't even listened to the witness audio statements. Had you done that you would know that their statements do not match up with GZ.

No what is stupid is thinking that TM knew that GZ was ever gonna get out of his car so he could have his golden oppurtunity to 'ambush' him. That is what is stupid. You create his fantasy story in your head that no witness backs up, the evidences doesn't back up, GZ family statements don't back it up, AND it requires TM to have physic abilities to know that GZ was gonna exit his car so he could attack him. That is what is stupid.

Thats the problem, you think you answered my questions, but like pops you skirt around them.

reply to post by fbluth


The thing is, the riots would be
real, and they would be sitting cozy at the RITZ
laughing their ass off.. It is sad..
The *THREAT* of civil
unrest and *going to burn it to the ground*
that was mustard up to get quite honestly
in my opinion, black people in a uproar
to fill Al and jacks pockets and get them face time
on tv....

reply to post by fbluth


You actually proved my point but thanks take a close look at the picture you posted then look where the privacy fences are the 1st one is after where they found Treyvons body. In these condos they share a patio and they put a fence between them for privacy.

Now judging from the location of the body how in the world could zimmerman have caught him if Treyvon went home which is another 200 ft away from Zimmerman unless he teleported in front of Treyvon do we have some weird magic going on here? Obviously from the location of the body and the path Zimmerman had to take Treyvon didnt go home did he? why not he lost George he was an athlete and George was out of shape.How can we explain the location where Treyvon was killed without Treyvon waiting for him. I think will go with the teleport theory its gotta work for you right he teleported in front of treyvon blocking his ability to go home.

reply to post by popsmayhem


The post you replied to had nothing to do with race.

Can you explain how Daddy Z went on Hannity, AFTER he WITNESSED the RE - ENACTMENT the NEXT DAY and said his son was 'sucker punched at the 'T' of the sidewalks, knocked to the ground, and TM got on his chest and starting beating him and slamming his head on the sidewalk, yet TM body is no where near the 'T'. How is that possible? Daddy can't be WRONG he WATCHED with his own 2 eyes what GZ told police happened.

How do you explain TM body so far away?



And since you won't be able to do that and will ignore it and bring up more lies about an ambush and made up race wars, let me ask you how you explain this.

If TM suckerpunched GZ, we've Georgie bloody nose....how is it that TM didn't get GZ blood on his hands? GZ had all that blood on his head and nose, yet not one drop was found on TM hands or sleeves of his hoodie. I would link the reports to prove these claims to you, but even if you read them, you wouldn't believe them, so I won't waste my time. How can TM have been beating GZ so bad, and GZ has all that blood on him, and yet TM has nonoe of GZ blood on his hands or under his nails.

I mean its just amazing that TM gave GZ such a good beating yet there is no evidence of that beating on TM's body...other than a 1/8''-1/4'' abrasion on one finger.

You can now ignore everything I just posted and reply with more lies and fantasy that only you and a few other people believe....the rest of us know your claims have all been proven false...yet you just can not let go of them. So much to the point you are basically calling your hero's father a bald face liar. Its kind of amusing if is wasn't so disturbing.

reply to post by dragonridr


You just like pops you ignore and call GZ father a liar.

See I can use stupid smileys too.

Daddy Z said GZ was attacked at the 'T'. Now you are saying that TM was I guess hiding behind something. So which is it? And how was TM supposed to know GZ would follow him AND how did he know where to hide so GZ would find him? See how ridiculous that is, no you don't. Is GZ dad a liar or are you spreading fantasies you have in your head?

George Zimmerman's Father - Full Interview on Trayvon Martin Shooting - Sean Hannity -- 4-4-12

So again tell me how the body got here.......



You can keep ignoring everything that is out there and ignoring all the evidence and be willfully ignorant if you want, but you look silly. It is very clear you and pops have both made up your minds and EVEN if GZ OWN family says you are wrong and lying .... well they are wrong and lying, and so it the evidence, and so are the witnesses.......

Im pretty sure why you do what you do, but Ill keep those reasons to myself.

Now, again, is GZ father a liar, is the evidence lying, is GZ lying, or are you lying?

Originally posted by fbluth
reply to post by dragonridr

 

You just like pops you ignore and call GZ father a liar.

See I can use stupid smileys too.

Daddy Z said GZ was attacked at the 'T'. Now you are saying that TM was I guess hiding behind something. So which is it? And how was TM supposed to know GZ would follow him AND how did he know where to hide so GZ would find him? See how ridiculous that is, no you don't. Is GZ dad a liar or are you spreading fantasies you have in your head?

George Zimmerman's Father - Full Interview on Trayvon Martin Shooting - Sean Hannity -- 4-4-12

So again tell me how the body got here.......



You can keep ignoring everything that is out there and ignoring all the evidence and be willfully ignorant if you want, but you look silly. It is very clear you and pops have both made up your minds and EVEN if GZ OWN family says you are wrong and lying .... well they are wrong and lying, and so it the evidence, and so are the witnesses.......

Im pretty sure why you do what you do, but Ill keep those reasons to myself.

Now, again, is GZ father a liar, is the evidence lying, is GZ lying, or are you lying?

edit on 25-5-2012 by fbluth because: (no reason given)

No he didnt say they fought at the t section you are misreading his fathers comments here they are:

"So he asked the dispatcher to have the responding unit call him, and he could tell him the address. So he walked down to the end of the street -- I'm sorry, to the end of the sidewalk to the next street to get an address.

He did not know at that time where Trayvon Martin had gone. As he was walking back to his vehicle, there was a sidewalk that goes to his left and Trayvon came from that area where the sidewalks meet.

He asked my son if he had a problem, and George said, no, I don't have a problem. Trayvon said, well, you do now. He punched him in the face, broke his nose, knocked him to the sidewalk, and got on him and started beating him."

In this statement he is describing the direction Treyvon came from the sidewalk to the left. Which was true as far as his second hand description.Him not being there i dont see why your stuck on this fact nothing he said is admissible he could have said his son shot him because he was black.It really doesnt matter its all here say.

Here let me lay it out for you to get Zimmerman to go to jail the prosecutor needs to prove Zimmerman walked up to Treyvon.Started the confrontation then shot him. Now by all means show me any evidence that shows this occured you do realize that when Omara questioned the investigator about this he admitted they have nothing to prove Zimmerman started the confrontation.In fact here read it your self.

O’MARA: My question was do you have any evidence to contradict or that conflicts with his contention given before he knew any of the evidence that would conflict with the fact that he stated I walked back to my car?

GILBREATH: No.

O’MARA: No evidence. Correct?

GILBREATH: Understanding — are you talking about at that point in time?

O’MARA: Since. Today. Do you have any evidence that conflicts with his suggestion that he had turned around and went back to his car?

GILBREATH: Other than his statement, no.

O’MARA: Any evidence that conflicts with that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He answered it. He said no.

O’MARA: Any evidence that conflicts any eyewitnesses, anything that conflicts with the contention that Mr. Martin assaulted first?

GILBREATH: That contention that was given to us by him, other than filling in the figures being one following or chasing the other one, as to who threw the first blow, no.

And:

O’MARA: The injuries seem to be consistent with his story, though, don’t they?

GILBREATH: The injuries are consistent with a harder object striking the back of his head than his head was.

O’MARA: Could that be cement?

GILBREATH: Could be.

O’MARA: Did you just say it was consistent or did you say it wasn’t consistent?

GILBREATH: I said it was.

O’MARA: Ok. Have you ever had your nose broken?

GILBREATH: No.

O’MARA: Have you ever had your nose fractured or broken.

GILBREATH: No.

O’MARA: You know that that was an injury that Mr. Zimmerman sustained, correct?

GILBREATH: I know that that is an injury that is reported to have sustained. I haven’t seen any medical records to indicate that.

O’MARA: Have you asked him for them?

GILBREATH: Have I asked him for them? No.

O’MARA: Do you want a copy of them?

GILBREATH: Sure.

O’MARA: I’ll give them to the state. It’s a more appropriate way to do it. If you haven’t had them yet, I don’t want to cross you on them.

Nothing further, thank you, your honor

reply to post by dragonridr


No. If TM was walking up the backyard side walk to the 'main sidewalk' as GZ daddy puts it, and TM body was found 30+ feet from there, that means that GZ had to COME TO TM....GZ father says he was ATTACKED on the main sidewalk he was on. The location of TM body proves that GZ daddy is lying. You can try and spin it any way you want. How did GZ get off of the 'main sidewalk' to shoot TM 30+ feet down the other sidewalk?

I know you don't like to believe GZ daddies words, cuz they don't fit the evidence, but his dad says he was punched and knocked to the ground and the fight happened at the spot of the punch. So how did GZ get 30+ off the main sidewalk to end up shooting TM in the grass?

The prosecution does not have to prove that GZ just walked up to TM and punched him. In your fantasy legal world thats how it has to happen, but in the real legal world thats not how it works.

Why didn't you quote the investigators answer to the prosecutions questions? You know like when he said that GZ statements to police do not match up with the evidence......why did you skip over that part? See, it just shows you are only hearing what you want to hear. The prosecution has so much more evidence that they don't need to 'just prove GZ walked up to TM and shot him'. That is one of the more classic GZ fans fairy tales that you all fall asleep dreaming about. Its gonna turn to a nightmare once the jury says 'Guilty'.........

Originally posted by fbluth
reply to post by dragonridr

 

No. If TM was walking up the backyard side walk to the 'main sidewalk' as GZ daddy puts it, and TM body was found 30+ feet from there, that means that GZ had to COME TO TM....GZ father says he was ATTACKED on the main sidewalk he was on. The location of TM body proves that GZ daddy is lying. You can try and spin it any way you want. How did GZ get off of the 'main sidewalk' to shoot TM 30+ feet down the other sidewalk?

I know you don't like to believe GZ daddies words, cuz they don't fit the evidence, but his dad says he was punched and knocked to the ground and the fight happened at the spot of the punch. So how did GZ get 30+ off the main sidewalk to end up shooting TM in the grass?

The prosecution does not have to prove that GZ just walked up to TM and punched him. In your fantasy legal world thats how it has to happen, but in the real legal world thats not how it works.

Why didn't you quote the investigators answer to the prosecutions questions? You know like when he said that GZ statements to police do not match up with the evidence......why did you skip over that part? See, it just shows you are only hearing what you want to hear. The prosecution has so much more evidence that they don't need to 'just prove GZ walked up to TM and shot him'. That is one of the more classic GZ fans fairy tales that you all fall asleep dreaming about. Its gonna turn to a nightmare once the jury says 'Guilty'.........

edit on 25-5-2012 by fbluth because: (no reason given)

Funny the guy that created the case against zimmerman admits he doesnt have a case and your stuck on a trivial point.Did it ever occur to you that when zimmerman was hit in the nose and cant see he tried to get away? Oh that didnt occur to you because for some reason its really important to you that he be found guilty.Have a vested interest i think i know why but none the less to each his own. Either way the person in charge of the investigation just told you that they cant discount his story but you think you can? Wow i guess florida better contact you quick because there in desperate need of your expertise. Oh and since you liked these earlier here you go just for you.

Originally posted by fbluth
Its not my theory, as you state in your condescending statement. It is what a witness told police. How is that MY theory?

Its not condescension... Its you once again opening your mouth and eating your feet to the extent of having tassles and shoe strings hanging out of your nose. Quit launching personal attacks when you get called out. Its easier to just admit you don't know than open your mouth and remove all doubt.


So you mispoke when you stated -

Originally posted by fbluth
reply to post by dragonridr

 

You forgot to mention your star witness told police in his interview at the station that he isn't sure who was yelling for help and that he only seen, who he claims to be TM on top, holding GZ down. So where is the threat to GZ life if he is only being held down AND he knows police are on the way?

Yes, I see your confusion now.

In the part I highlighted above please explain if that was stated by "John" the witness or if that was "you" asking a question.

Originally posted by fbluth
However, no one said there wasn't a scuffle on the ground. This witness is just saying that he doesn't know who was yelling and that TM was simply holding GZ down and not beating him 'MMA style'. That just indicates that when this witness got out and seen TM holding GZ (if it was TM, all other witness say it was GZ on top), that he missed the scuffle on the ground. Why is that so hard to understand?

So then please explain where GZ injuries came from because It is apparent that is exactly what you are stating.

Originally posted by fbluth
It is unfortunate that you don't understand the difference between what witness state to police and what you consider 'my theory'.....and you a police officer? Holy smokes.

Do you need a hug?

/Hug

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by fbluth

 

BTW, a deposition is where a witness may be led by the questions, because there are no attorneys present from the defense, and no judge to rule whether the statements can be heard by the jury.

Leading to the extent as long as the question being asked is wihin the scope of the depoition. Lawyers for both sides can be present. A question in dispute can be refused to be answered. If the side who intiated the deposition has issues with the refusal it can go to a judge and if I am not mistaken a contempt order ca be issued by the judge.

To be honest, and if I am mistaekn my bad, but it sounds like their is confusion between a deposition and a grand jury hearing. A grand jury hearing allows for witnesses to be asked leading questions, no real right to defense counsel etc etc etc..

Lemme know...

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by Resurected
But Sanford Police homicide investigator Chris Serino, in filing a “capias” request recommending a manslaughter charge against Zimmerman, stated in his report that Zimmerman could have avoided the confrontation with Martin by remaining in his vehicle, or by identifying himself to Martin to “allay his concerns.”reply to post by dragonridr

 

From a very fast google search.

For the rest, the only witnesses that did almost link up with Zimmermans story the same ones who in the last few days say they dont really know what happened.. It been the subject of its own threads, and gone over here so i dont think i really need to bring that up again. Also we know the girlfriend on the phone etc.. That is why i asked just what witnesses went along with Zimmermans side of things? I cant think of any so far other then Zimmerman himself.

edit on 23-5-2012 by Resurected because: (no reason given)

That is how the justice system works.
No evidence of a crime no charges.
It is not mob rule black mailing people
by *rioting* if you do not get your way.
If the system does what it is suppose
to do and public opinion despite all evidence
tries to force the system to act unjust.
I see no proof or evidence that zimmerman
did not act in self defense. Treyvon attacking
zimmerman story has held up through all the lies
and bs the media has spun. Since that happen
treyvon decided his fate no one else.

A capius warrant is issued when the requesting party is requiring the suspect go before a judge before being granted bond. It means if a person is arrested on a warrant, and the warrant is capius, it means the person cannot bond out of jail until going before a judge and is usually reserved for high rofile crimes in addition to use in the juvenile system.

If there is a warrant issued for a runway minor its automatically capius.

When it comes to bond / bail hearings, larger cities can do this by phone (even smaller cities, just depends on the judge / judicial system they use). The PA calls up the judge and explains whats going on. A judge can issue a bail / bond order over the phone without the individual ever coming into court. It allows a person so be charged and bond / bail as opposed to sitting in a cell for weeks, depending on the ize of the area / judicial load / PA load, investigative qualities / evidence etc.

A capius says no to the verbal / phone setup and states a person must appear in person in frton of a judge before proceeding.

Police can request a capius right up there with asking the PA to file charges against a person. Thats where involvement stops though, with again the end result being the final decision of the PA and not the police. There has to be reasons behind the request, justifiable ones and not just because a detective / PA is pissed.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by fbluth

 

BTW, a deposition is where a witness may be led by the questions, because there are no attorneys present from the defense, and no judge to rule whether the statements can be heard by the jury.

Leading to the extent as long as the question being asked is wihin the scope of the depoition. Lawyers for both sides can be present. A question in dispute can be refused to be answered. If the side who intiated the deposition has issues with the refusal it can go to a judge and if I am not mistaken a contempt order ca be issued by the judge.

To be honest, and if I am mistaekn my bad, but it sounds like their is confusion between a deposition and a grand jury hearing. A grand jury hearing allows for witnesses to be asked leading questions, no real right to defense counsel etc etc etc..

Lemme know...

Ok i think your right it just worded funny any way in a deposition it follows Federal Rules of Civil Procedure here in my state as well as Florida. This explains in detail how a deposition is supposed to occur. Basic run down is it starts by taking the oath,After agreeing to the oath it starts. The attorney who has ordered the deposition begins questioning of the deponent aka direct examination ( I all ways love this part because i like to save a couple of shock questions right for the end it throws them off when there attorney does cross). Then there attorney if present can cross examine asking his questions (this usually where the attorney will try to correct errors that were made).And then it can go into redirect and recross.Now at any time the attorneys can object to a question and there client doesnt have to answer. This can turn into major tedium as you try to figure out how to word the question so thier counsel wont object.Now there really isn't contempt filed for not answering generally all objections, in particular those involving the rules of evidence, are generally preserved until trial.

Now as far as Grand Jury is kind of an outdated mode of trial it was a step that used to be inserted to see if a case should go to a judge.This is largely not used anymore since this is exactly what the States Attorneys office does.This is why in Florida they were considering it it takes the heat off the Florida state attorney. Shes in an elected position and if the public isnt happy she can loose her job.

Originally posted by solarjetman
reply to post by butcherguy

 

I don't know about that...there are different levels. A ton of people smoke weed, including many brilliant thinkers, poets, artists, engineers. I'm not calling Trayvon a brilliant thinker, but I simply don't think smoking weed is a big deal, and I certainly don't think that it is a "gateway" that makes someone prone to breaking the law in other more serious ways either. My point was simply that the media can be biased in more than one way-- hence you don't hear about Zimmerman's Temazepam and Adderall prescriptions, whose side effects can include aggression and mood instability.

Something to keep in mind when it comes to controlled substnces in a persons system. While I understand the argument you are making about weed, I dont subscribe to it. What a person does in the privacy of their own home that does not adversely affect someone else / place a child endanger is their own business. Bringing it outside is a different matter so I will digress...

Are Temazepam and Adderall a controlled narcotic where possession without prescription is a felony? - YES

Is Marijuana a controlled substance where possession is a misdemeanor / felony (+>35grams)? - YES

What it comes down to in this case, on this topic, is was possession of the drugs, either on their person or in their system, lawful? Since Trayvon was not driving a motorvehicle attempting to argue constructive possession is a non starter so you can chuck that angle out the window. Attempting to make an argument on how a person reacts to a drug that is illegal to be in possession of in the first place is also an undermining position to argue from -
EX - "Yes my client was using marijauana at the time of the incident but listen....."

Using one crime in an effort to justify or mitigate the second.. Bad joo joo all around on that one since it now looks to a judge or jury that the person not only breaks the law, he cannot accept responsibility for his own actions by arguing his initial law violation was the cause of the second, and therefore not their responsibility.

***BTW - I hope this makes sense. I am trying to give an idea of how the drug arguement most likely will play out and how to view it for investigative viewpoints. I am not trying to lecture on drug use or a persons personal point of view. ***

Admitting your clients illegal / legal drug ( in GZ's case) use in order to explain away / justify actions does not usually work out well, especially if its a jury / bench trial.

As for Zimmerman the question becomes -
Was he in lawful possession of the medication?
Was there any violations of Floridas CCW laws when it came to possession of a concealed weapon?
Was there any violations of Floridas CCW laws when it came to the use of a weapon?

Those questions hinge on Florida Statute - Conceal Carry Laws-
So long as Zimmerman is within the boxes for that, then the drugs are a non factor. A person must understand the entire law and not just the bits and pieces of it, especially when it comes to CCW. Please keep in mind possession of a CCW is in its own separate law, and while covered / referenced under SYG law, they must be viewed in their entirety - separately.

I say that because if Zimmermans use of controlled narcotics in no way broke FL CCW law, then the drugs are no longer a factor to consider in terms of the legality of the shoot itself. Also, neither Zimmerman nor Martin knew the other was on any controlled substance, again bringing the view point back to what did each person perceive the momet they opted to use force? (hindsight 20/20 is a bitch as we all can see).

Yes it can all be left to the court to sort out - just to clarify that position. Sometimes when issues of law arise where there is a possible conflict / ambiguity / unintended result, the judge can, and a great many do, allow both sides to argue and allow the judge / jury to sort it out in their decision.

Originally posted by solarjetman
I feel kind of ridiculous having to explain why smoking weed isn't a big deal, but I'll be honest-- if this weren't Trayvon who were in question, I have a strong feeling none of us would even be thinking twice about this incredibly insignificant issue.

If this werent Trayvon Martin we also would not have a racial issue being made when there is none either.

However, in this case, the presence of THC goes to character, as someone else pointed it out. When you are going to paint your client as an angle, the other side has a right to impeach the facts. If Trayvons Mother gets on the stand and is asked if her child is a good child with no issues in terms of authority, responsibility and criminal activity, she is ngoing to answer.

If her answer is in conflict with information available, then the information can be used to counter the testimony to present the other side of the argument. There are all sorts of loops and legal loopholes (asking a question and having the witness accidentally open the door themselves etc).

The question to think about is not so much about Trayvons use of the drug, but the manner of the drug use in context.

Just one possible way to view this -
Does Trayvan Martin smoke weed? - Yes
Does John Doe smoke weed? - Yes

Does Trayvon Martin have a history of disciplinary problems? - Yes
Does John Doe have an issue of disciplinary problems? - No

Does TM have a history of assaultive / aggressive / abusive behavior - Yes?
Does John Doe have a history of assaultive / aggressive / abusive behavior - No?

All are separate issues and are viewed as individuals however you have a culmination at the end. The actions show both broke the law by smoking weed. However their actions also show a different history coupled with that use. One showing a repeating pattern of bad behavior and lack of responsibility and one showing the same in a different context.

For THC and Martin it revolves around character - Good child verse problem child. Was his use of Marijuana just a continuation of a series of bad decisions?

For GZ and his pills it will focus on possession and use at time of incident and if they played a part in what occured.

Since Martin and GZ are in different classifications for this, dead vs accused, the extent of how the info is used is also restricted. Martin is not on trial so any mention in an attempt to shift blame must either be supported or once again risk coming back to blaming something / someone elses actions in an attempt to deflect.

Sorry for the rant.. Hope it made some sense...

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by Resurected
But Sanford Police homicide investigator Chris Serino, in filing a “capias” request recommending a manslaughter charge against Zimmerman, stated in his report that Zimmerman could have avoided the confrontation with Martin by remaining in his vehicle, or by identifying himself to Martin to “allay his concerns.”reply to post by dragonridr

 

From a very fast google search.

For the rest, the only witnesses that did almost link up with Zimmermans story the same ones who in the last few days say they dont really know what happened.. It been the subject of its own threads, and gone over here so i dont think i really need to bring that up again. Also we know the girlfriend on the phone etc.. That is why i asked just what witnesses went along with Zimmermans side of things? I cant think of any so far other then Zimmerman himself.

edit on 23-5-2012 by Resurected because: (no reason given)

That is how the justice system works.
No evidence of a crime no charges.
It is not mob rule black mailing people
by *rioting* if you do not get your way.
If the system does what it is suppose
to do and public opinion despite all evidence
tries to force the system to act unjust.
I see no proof or evidence that zimmerman
did not act in self defense. Treyvon attacking
zimmerman story has held up through all the lies
and bs the media has spun. Since that happen
treyvon decided his fate no one else.

A capius warrant is issued when the requesting party is requiring the suspect go before a judge before being granted bond. It means if a person is arrested on a warrant, and the warrant is capius, it means the person cannot bond out of jail until going before a judge and is usually reserved for high rofile crimes in addition to use in the juvenile system.

If there is a warrant issued for a runway minor its automatically capius.

When it comes to bond / bail hearings, larger cities can do this by phone (even smaller cities, just depends on the judge / judicial system they use). The PA calls up the judge and explains whats going on. A judge can issue a bail / bond order over the phone without the individual ever coming into court. It allows a person so be charged and bond / bail as opposed to sitting in a cell for weeks, depending on the ize of the area / judicial load / PA load, investigative qualities / evidence etc.

A capius says no to the verbal / phone setup and states a person must appear in person in frton of a judge before proceeding.

Police can request a capius right up there with asking the PA to file charges against a person. Thats where involvement stops though, with again the end result being the final decision of the PA and not the police. There has to be reasons behind the request, justifiable ones and not just because a detective / PA is pissed.

The only thing id add is it doesnt all ways apply to bond hearings unless of course your a police officer its all you would see.But basically its used to compel someone to do something like appear before a judge or compel someone to perform an action.For example payment of a debt or even submission of documents to a court.It doesnt imply guilt or innocence unlike an arrest warrant which means there is evidence enough to detain you.

reply to post by dragonridr


Your right it didn't occur to me, just like it shouldn't occur to you.

GZ daddy who was present for the re enactment the next day and saw what GZ told police happened said he was knocked to the ground after the first punch, and then TM got on him right at that spot and started beating his head and face for a minute. So your little fantasy about GZ getting hit and trying to get away is just another of you fantasies.

So again, is Daddy Z lying or are you?

You just admitted you cherry picked statements from the bond hearing, you keep ignoring that the INV also said that GZ statement contradict the evidence, but I know when words like that are spoken, GZ fans become deaf all the sudden.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Your insults mean nothing to me, keep em coming.

Ill leave you guessing. I thought you knew all about this case? If you had you would have read and listened to all of Johns statements to police. If you had done that you wouldn't ask silly questions you already knew the answers to. I can't make you read and listen to his interviews, but they are available for your pleasure to enjoy....for some reason you don't want to and you want me to tell what is in them. Ive listened to each and every interview available so far and read all the documents, your question about Johns statements prove you have not. I don't feel you have the right to question me when you have not even bothered to review the available evidence.

His 'injuries' came during the scuffle on the ground, just like TM injuries happened during that same time....his bullet wound happened during that time as well. Why don't you question that?

So smart guy, how did TM manage to 'beat' GZ to a bloody pulp and not get any DNA of GZ on his shirt sleeves or his hands, or under his fingernails? How did GZ get that bloody nose since TM fist didn't do it. How did he get those scratches since TM fingernails didn't do it? IT ALL HAPPENED DURING THE 'SCUFFLE'.

Before you question the DNA results, I suggest you have a look at the reports available online and linked in this thread probably several times. You know all those documents and audio files you refuse to listen to..........you really should take the time instead of having typical internet cop mentality and just wanting to fight.

And no, you can keep you hugs to yourself. GZ will needs all your love and attention when you are guarding him in prison.

serious entertainment from anonymous profiles...

"cant we all just get along"

just sayin'

reply to post by fbluth


which original profile are you a sock to, seriously we have all wondered and you have been asked before, its time for you to come out.....come on spill it!!!

No, we can't all get along.

Being right is serious business and Zimmerman must be tried by the monkey house.

Not the law.

reply to post by rebellender


Instead of accusing why don't you address the points in the post you replied to.

Would that be because you can't and you think accusing me of things will somehow makes those points go away? Nice try, but it won't work on me. I can stay on topic.

Re read the post you replied to and start by addressing the points I made in it. But I don't think you want to stay on topic, I think it is a motive of about 5-6 poster on this page to purposefully stay off top and use personal attacks to derail the conversation, keep repeating the same old lies that have been proven to be lies, just to make sure that they don't have to talk about the real evidence against GZ. Like....

How on earth did TM beat GZ to such a bloody, life endangering pulp, yet he had NONE of GZ blood on his hands, under his nails, or on the sleeves of his clothes. Now doesn't that just seem amaziing to you? He gave GZ that bloody nose from the suckerpunch, right? And TM kept wailing on GZ head and kept beating it in the ground, right? Yet somehow, someway, defying all logic and reality, TM has NONE of GZ blood on his hands, under his nails, or on his sleeves of his clothing. Oh wait, I bet a rain storm came over top of TM and washed all that blood away and left the blood on GZ. That must have been what happened. Just like a rain storm hit GZ and washed all but 1 particle of GSR off of his clothes, yet somehow let the blood on his head. That must have been what happened. The rain selectively washed away some evidence and left other evidence. That must be what happened. Rain is funny that way.

This TM was AMAZING!!!! He was physic - He knew that IF he RAN that would BAIT GZ into CHASING him, he KNEW that if HE HID, that GZ would take the path that he was hiding on AND he would have the golden moment to jump out and attack,BUT 1st he had to run home, drop of his weed and codeine for his 'sizzurp/lean', AND then go back and hide, in about 1 minute or so. He THEN beats a mans face and head in repeatedly for over a minute and the man is bloody mess, yet SOMEHOW TM has NONE of GZ blood on him, AND then he gets up and moves his own dead body from where GZ father says the attack happened to 30+ feet away.........Its a shame TM could do ALL of that yet he couldn't stop GZ speeding bullet to his heart.

I guess he had only limited super powers.

Oh, yeah, his ghost is also now intimidating and harassing witnesses to ensure they change their stories to make sure GZ is guilty.

reply to post by EvilSadamClone


I think your confused. What you meant to say was 'Being right is serious business and Trayvon Martin must be tried by the monkey house.'

See, GZ will get to be tried in court. I can see your confusion though. Seeing how some people who post on this board actually think its Trayvon Martin on trial and not GZ. Its confusing, All the constitutional scholars on here forget that in America we don't try dead juveniles, or men, toddlers, or the elderly for that matter. I can see how you may get confused since you have only posted 4 replies in a 350+ page thread. And, Especially with all the GZ fans that repeatedly promote lies and false evidence it may be hard to distinguish what a GZ fan TELLS you is fact and what is actual fact. Ive noticed that most GZ fans don't understand that a fact isn't just something that they WANT to have happened. But Ive also learned that you can't explain that too them, because 5 post later they will repeat the same lie again as FACT.

Zimmerman will be tried by the law, I wonder why you think or say he won't be. Hmmm.