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

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused


The facts as they show before me right now are that Martin was unarmed and not breaking any laws. Zimmerman chose to follow him due to his own thoughts about what Martin might be doing there. Why it was his business, well, I guess he thought it was, as he was "The Watch Captain." Okay, whatever. Not a crime.

At some point, there was a scuffle and Trayvon was shot by Zimmerman with Zimmerman's gun. That's really about all we know that's important--the rest is filler thrown in to make everyone argue and stay confused.

Zimmerman did not break any laws. Treyvon did though, your wrong!!
Since we know there was a scuffle, a fight,
and treyvon had no cuts or bruises on him or any signs of a struggle.
THAT zimmerman never hit treyvon! Which would mean treyvon
enganged in the only illegal activity that day by starting the fight and assaulting zimmerman..
Trayvon Martin's funeral director: No signs of fight
www.thegrio.com...
Well, why would a man who has a gun
that was on the phone with 911
waiting for police to get there
start a fist fight with a guy he did not know
was armed or not? He wouldn't, most law abiding people smart
enough to conceal and carry is smart enough
to know you do not pick a fist fight with a armed person..
Treyvon was the only one that knew trayvon had no gun,
so if zimmerman knew he himself had a gun, but did not know if treyvon did or not
why would zimmerman start a fist fight knowing if he throws a fist the other guy
might shoot him? He wouldn't. Treyvon not thinking, let his emotions get the best
of him and he started a fist fight. Had treyvon REALLY felt
threatened by zimmerman, he would of ran when his G/F told him too, he sized zimmerman
up, and thought he could take him in a fist fight. Zimmerman would of never caught up with
treyvon had treyvon not wanted him too...

Originally posted by popsmayhem
Just because that BIAS one sided argumented article says that it does not support zimmermans
claim does not mean it is true. Have you people learnt nothing?
We know he hit someone, evidence is zimmermans face.
People came running out of the house, and there are witnesses
who were there and zimmerman had NO TIME to injure himself.
So if he did not injure himself then treyvon injured him.
Which means since treyvon injured him and he has no bruises
or marks that zimmerman NEVER PUNCHED OR TOUCHED HIM AT ALL.
If zimmerman never punched treyvon at all then we know that it was treyvon
who instigated the whole thing by puttingh is hands on zimmerman

edit on 29-3-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)

Wow you are missing the point

It makes no difference what the "bias" article is saying. You are clearly not understanding what the lack of marks means. So let me try again to explain it for you. This is not my opinion, this is what the Mortician is saying no matter how you try to spin it.

If you were to punch me in the face repeatedly your hand would bruise. You may even cut your hand or more specifically your knuckles on my teeth. In any event, you would have markings. Even if you punch me in the face and knock me out cold, your hand will have bruising. a cut or at the very least some swelling. It is the same thing that happens if you punch a wall. You may damage the wall, but your going to hurt your hand. You will show some sign on your hand that proves you hit a wall. The same principle holds true in this case. If Martin punched Zimmerman, than Martin should show some sign on his hands of having been fighting. Bruises, cuts, a jammed finger, swelling, something.

So by saying that Martin shows no sign of having been in a fight means that Martin did not punch Zimmerman. If Zimmerman really had a broken nose, which we are assuming is true since no medical records have been released proving his claim, than what this means is someone else- not Trayvon Martin, punched him.

Quick question "popsmayhem"

Were you present when this occured?

If not, how can you continue to make statements and act as if they are facts?

Cheers

Originally posted by MrWendal
So by saying that Martin shows no sign of having been in a fight means that Martin did not punch Zimmerman.

So zimmerman NEVER punched treyvon since treyvon HAS
NO SIGNS OF BEING IN A FIGHT RIGHT? CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAY FOLKS!!

If zimmerman never punched treyvon
but there was a fight then the only
person who threw a punch was treyvon meaning he started the whole damn thing.
If treyvon started the whole damn thing zimmerman had every right to defend himself.

reply to post by popsmayhem


Have you viewed his body?

Not all punches leave marks also.

You are doing so much assuming and acting like everything that helps your opinion is a fact.

Cheers

reply to post by MrWendal


No offense, because we usually agree, but if you are privy to the mortician reports......

Then please post them.........

However that being said, youre saying that Martin shows no sign of this.......how would you know this? because NONE of that has been released?

Just like none of zimmermans records have been released.....

Now being that there was a scuffle and there was a shooting , we know that BOTH have been examined and none of the information has been released to the public.....

For zimmerman OR martin.....we know for a fact, the autopsy of Martin AND the examination of zimmerman havent been released......as per legal statutes....

So how could you know any of this, except for presumtion ?

Otherwise its hearsay

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


Also a mortician is not a medical examiner. Im getting pretty skeptical of Zimmerman though. Still we need real facts, info from ME, actual hospital reports, report from medics etc. Also, still innocent until proven guilty. Also Im not sure but I believing bruising would take time to occur and wouldnt happen after heart stopped.

reply to post by MrWendal


Yeah.. but let's be honest. The funeral director most likely didn't pay much attention to the hands because at the time Trayvon was with him and at the time of the burial there was no media circus going on. He might not have even paid real attention. It is most likely all he knew was that the kid was shot and was being buried he didn't know how much contention there would eventually be over the case and no one was arrested so I doubt he did much personal investigation.

Just being honest.

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

 

Also a mortician is not a medical examiner. Im getting pretty skeptical of Zimmerman though. Still we need real facts, info from ME, actual hospital reports, report from medics etc. Also, still innocent until proven guilty. Also Im not sure but I believing bruising would take time to occur and wouldnt happen after heart stopped.

Call them what you want.......ok ill get technical a MEDICAL EXAMINER........still the report has NOT been made public........

Thats the thing, everyone is making presumptions W OUT KNOWING FACTS.........

Whats going to happen if the story lines up?

What if it doesnt?

The point is everyone is making presumptions and claims w OUT this report being out........its reckless and irresponsible

People always claim about others being convicted before they are proven guilty........about people not having their day in court.....

Yet they are willing to convict someone before the hard facts are out............

What kills me is their unwillingness to see this factor in themselves........and that they pass judgement on their own emotions and not what is.......and what isnt.......

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


You are right.
As evidenced in this very thread I was a hardcore supporter of Trayvon's defense and condemned Zimmerman. Now I am not so sure, but since I have expressed this to some of my "friends" on facebook I have been called racist and a white apologist. They have no idea that I personally was against Zimmerman in the beginning, but it's ridiculous.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by MrWendal

 

No offense, because we usually agree, but if you are privy to the mortician reports......

Then please post them.........

However that being said, youre saying that Martin shows no sign of this.......how would you know this? because NONE of that has been released?

Just like none of zimmermans records have been released.....

Now being that there was a scuffle and there was a shooting , we know that BOTH have been examined and none of the information has been released to the public.....

For zimmerman OR martin.....we know for a fact, the autopsy of Martin AND the examination of zimmerman havent been released......as per legal statutes....

So how could you know any of this, except for presumtion ?

Otherwise its hearsay

edit on 30-3-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)

See, I understand this but the people
that think zimmerman is guilty are acting like
this is sort of a revelation, when in fact this *funeral director*
is a big moron and I would not go by what he has to say at all.
BUT FOR YOU ZIMMERMAN IS GUILTY FOLKS, KEEP POSTING
THE FUNERAL DIRECTOR and ABC VIDEO AS EVIDENCE...
Keep looking like fools!!
Remember the video that came out the other night
that was the zimmerman is guilty smoking gun, now it is the funeral directors statements.
They want to point at the police video and say ZIMMERMAN DOES NOT LOOK LIKE HE HAS BEEN IN A FIGHT!!
But then say look treyvon has no bruises so zimmerman was the only one hitting and shooting anyone..

DO YOU PEOPLE SEE THIS??

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by MrWendal
So by saying that Martin shows no sign of having been in a fight means that Martin did not punch Zimmerman.

So zimmerman NEVER punched treyvon since treyvon HAS
NO SIGNS OF BEING IN A FIGHT RIGHT? CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAY FOLKS!!

If zimmerman never punched treyvon
but there was a fight then the only
person who threw a punch was treyvon meaning he started the whole damn thing.
If treyvon started the whole damn thing zimmerman had every right to defend himself.

Again you are missing the point.

The Mortician is saying that Martin has no signs on HIS HANDS. I am not talking about marks on the body. I am talking about marks on Martin's hands. If Martin punched Zimmerman, there would be marks on Martin's hands. There are none. There are no marks on Martin's hands that would indicate he punched anyone at all.

If Zimmerman has no marks on his hands, that would mean Zimmerman did not punch Trayvon. If Trayvon has no marks on his hands, that means Trayvon did not punch Zimmerman.

Why is this such a difficult concept for you to grasp?

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Zimmerman did not break any laws. Treyvon did though, your wrong!!
Since we know there was a scuffle, a fight,
and treyvon had no cuts or bruises on him or any signs of a struggle.
THAT zimmerman never hit treyvon! Which would mean treyvon
enganged in the only illegal activity that day by starting the fight and assaulting zimmerman..

What law did Treyvon break? Honestly you are started to sound daffy -

Buying Skittles and an Iced Tea is criminal, is walking?

If Treyvon did not have signs of cuts or bruises maybe that means that

A. the fight was not very serious

and or

B. He was good at fighting or Zimmerman couldn't fight for squat

None of which warrant a death sentence

None of which would indicate who started the fight.

Zimmerman could have threw a wide punch and missed...

Really man, you are failing here

reply to post by MrWendal


Why would the funeral director even know to look though? The story wasn't even big until Martin was long buried. He may have not even know there was supposed to have been a fight. I would say he likely didn't pay much attention honestly.

reply to post by braindeadconservatives


I thought so too. I think Pops method of attack is off, and I think he supported Zimmerman before there was ever any reason to. However now evidence, to me, is pointing towards Zimmerman's story being the truth.

If Martin did attack Zimmerman after he had left the search and was returning to his car and was on top of him beating his head then the shooting would have been justified. I was a big Martin supporter at the beginning, but evidence has turned to the contrary and that is undeniable.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by MrWendal

 

No offense, because we usually agree, but if you are privy to the mortician reports......

Then please post them.........

However that being said, youre saying that Martin shows no sign of this.......how would you know this? because NONE of that has been released?

Just like none of zimmermans records have been released.....

Now being that there was a scuffle and there was a shooting , we know that BOTH have been examined and none of the information has been released to the public.....

For zimmerman OR martin.....we know for a fact, the autopsy of Martin AND the examination of zimmerman havent been released......as per legal statutes....

So how could you know any of this, except for presumtion ?

Otherwise its hearsay

edit on 30-3-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)

The link is here in the thread. Page 93 I believe. It has been linked a few times, by several people. The Mortician did a couple interviews. Here is the link again

Funeral Director speaks

This is what he said.

The man who prepared Trayvon Martin's body for his funeral did at least two interviews on Wednesday, declaring that the 17-year-old did not have any cuts or bruises on his hands to support George Zimmerman's claim that he was in a fight with the teen before he killed him.

Zimmerman told police that he shot Martin in self defense after Martin repeatedly punched him and slammed his head into the ground. He has not been arrested for the killing.

I really can not believe this point is up for debate. Either the Funeral Director is a liar, is mistaken, or he is telling the truth. You decide.

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by MrWendal
So by saying that Martin shows no sign of having been in a fight means that Martin did not punch Zimmerman.

So zimmerman NEVER punched treyvon since treyvon HAS
NO SIGNS OF BEING IN A FIGHT RIGHT? CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAY FOLKS!!

If zimmerman never punched treyvon
but there was a fight then the only
person who threw a punch was treyvon meaning he started the whole damn thing.
If treyvon started the whole damn thing zimmerman had every right to defend himself.

Again you are missing the point.

The Mortician is saying that Martin has no signs on HIS HANDS. I am not talking about marks on the body. I am talking about marks on Martin's hands. If Martin punched Zimmerman, there would be marks on Martin's hands. There are none. There are no marks on Martin's hands that would indicate he punched anyone at all.

If Zimmerman has no marks on his hands, that would mean Zimmerman did not punch Trayvon. If Trayvon has no marks on his hands, that means Trayvon did not punch Zimmerman.

Why is this such a difficult concept for you to grasp?

Remember the other day it was the video from ABC that was the smoking gun
that zimmerman was guilty, now tonight it is the FUNERAL DIRECTOR
that is the smoking gun PROVING ZIMMERMAN IS GUILTY!!?

What will be the zimmerman is guilty smoking gun tomorrow some more BS?

They want to point at the police video and say ZIMMERMAN DOES NOT LOOK LIKE HE HAS BEEN IN A FIGHT LOOK THE VIDEO PROVES HE IS NOT INJURED he does not LOOK hurt enough
for me to believe he was in fear for his life. proves zimmerman was not
in fear for his life look at the video he doesnt look injured! lulzz smokin gun mAAAAN!!

Then tonight say !!!look treyvon has no bruises, or cuts, LOOK
SAYS THE FUNERAL DIRECTOR! So treyvon MUST OF NEVER HIT
zimmerman..

reply to post by MrWendal


You are ignoring the point I made and I think it is a very valid one. At the time the funeral director would have been in contact with Trayvon's body there would be no questioning the story because there was no extensive investigation he may not have even known that Martin supposedly threw a punch. Trayvon was long buried when the media circus began and so the funeral director is undoubtedly making his remarks from his memory and he may be trusting memories that were simple glances at the hands.

At the time the body was in his possession why would he be looking at the hands really?

Originally posted by popsmayhem

See, I understand this but the people
that think zimmerman is guilty are acting like
this is sort of a revelation, when in fact this *funeral director*
is a big moron and I would not go by what he has to say at all.
BUT FOR YOU ZIMMERMAN IS GUILTY FOLKS, KEEP POSTING
THE FUNERAL DIRECTOR and ABC VIDEO AS EVIDENCE...
Keep looking like fools!!
Remember the video that came out the other night
that was the zimmerman is guilty smoking gun, now it is the funeral directors statements.
They want to point at the police video and say ZIMMERMAN DOES NOT LOOK LIKE HE HAS BEEN IN A FIGHT!!
But then say look treyvon has no bruises so zimmerman was the only one hitting and shooting anyone..

DO YOU PEOPLE SEE THIS??

edit on 30-3-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)

Wait a second...

NOW you dont want to go by the funeral director, but just 3 pages back you were saying that this funeral director's statement is "proof" that Trayvon Martin attacked Zimmerman!! Now that I have sat here and explained to you what this funeral director is saying, now you want to say it does not matter??

Here is YOUR post!!

Originally posted by popsmayhem
Trayvon Martin's funeral director: No signs of fight
www.thegrio.com...

Even more evidence that treyvon was the agressor
attacking zimmerman!!
WE KNOW there was an altercation before the shooting
witnesses saw treyvon on top of zimmerman before the shooting attacking him,
this just further proves that treyvon attacked zimmerman. Of course treyvon
has no marks or bruises because zimmerman did nothing to him until
he was in fear for his life being attacked by treyvon

So who is trying to have it both ways here?

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by braindeadconservatives

 

I thought so too. I think Pops method of attack is off, and I think he supported Zimmerman before there was ever any reason to. However now evidence, to me, is pointing towards Zimmerman's story being the truth.

If Martin did attack Zimmerman after he had left the search and was returning to his car and was on top of him beating his head then the shooting would have been justified. I was a big Martin supporter at the beginning, but evidence has turned to the contrary and that is undeniable.

If Martin followed Zimmerman and then beat him up, then maybe I will feel different.

However, I do not understand the mechanics of that, I also do not understand the motive.

If you are an honest broker, great, what is your opinion on this.

I do not understand why;

Zimmerman would call the police,

Be told not to investigate by the police.

Confront Martin anyways.

Walk away from Martin

Have Martin follow him and then beat him -


That chain of events does not click with me and it does not sound plausible

The fact the Zimmerman disregarded the dispatchers instructions indicates to me that
he is hot head or desire expressing the sense of power/excitment his "watch" position
provided him.