It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


George Zimmerman to be charged in Trayvon Martin shooting, official says

page: 16
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 03:49 AM

Originally posted by WingedBull
Martin died less than a 1/10th of a mile from his home. If he did run, he could have made it home in those two minutes between the time Zimmerman says he is running and the end of the 911 tape. This would indicate he had no interest in losing his pursuer.

As I stated to Libertygal, we don't know what was even going through Trayvons head at the time. The fact his route didn't meet your standards of logic does not add much to whether he ever confronted Zimmerman himself.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
And you know this how? You were there?

No, I know from the audio tape that Trayvon ran, I know from the audio that Zimmerman initially persued him. This is all from Zimmerman himself. Whether Trayvon walked back and confronted Zimmerman, or whether Trayvon ambushed Zimmerman, there is nothing out there to show for it. Atleast nothing we've heard of.

You know for a fact he didn't confront Zimmerman for following him?

I never stated that Trayvon never confronted Zimmerman, he could have, but there's just no evidence that he did. We already know that Zimmerman initially persued Trayvon and that he was highly suspicious of him.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 03:49 AM

Originally posted by shepseskaf
LMFAO!! Liquid stitches?

It's also called medicinal superglue. It exists.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
matches the the concoction of lies he made up that night?

You know he is lying, how?

Originally posted by shepseskaf
If the places were reversed and Trayvon had sauntered into a police station with no visible injuries

Except the ones shown by ABC News. Why do the anti-Zimmerman people keep ignoring these injuries?

Originally posted by shepseskaf
after a "life and death battle" merely 35 minutes prior, the people now defending GZ would be screaming at the top of their lungs that lies were being told.

And you know this, how?

Originally posted by shepseskaf
Its perfectly obvious that GZ's account of what happened is not true. The lead detective on the case didn't believe him, and neither do a lot of rational-thinking persons -- of all races.

Oh, so it's a racial issue. If you think there shouldn't be a rush to judgment, if you don't think facts should be substituted for emotion and speculation, then you are a racist. Got it. Yup, that's rational-thinking.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 03:54 AM

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
As I stated to Libertygal, we don't know what was even going through Trayvons head at the time. The fact his route didn't meet your standards of logic does not add much to whether he ever confronted Zimmerman himself.

Never said as a statement of fact that he doubled-back on Zimmerman. In fact, I stated quite clearly what I think happened. Perhaps you should actually try reading my posts, instead of just making up things. But, as we've seen in this thread, facts don't matter when speculation and lies will do.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
And you know this how? You were there?

No, I know from the audio tape that Trayvon ran, I know from the audio that Zimmerman initially persued him.

No, you do not know that. In the audio-tapes, Zimmerman never says he is chasing Martin after the dispatcher says the police doesn't need him to and then says he doesn't know where Martin is.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
This is all from Zimmerman himself.

No, it is not. Please, show us the exact point in the transcript where Zimmerman says he is still following Martin after the dispatcher says he doesn't need to.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 03:55 AM
reply to post by Xcathdra

Zimmerman was lawfully in possession of his gun and had the permits required by law in order to carry and conceal it.

Hey X!

I do believe he was in violation of his Neighborhood Watch P&P by carrying a weapon, however, be it gun or knife, or whatever.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:00 AM

Originally posted by WingedBull

If Zimmerman was not looking for Martin why was he there?

There is a link to a map with a time line of the 911 call.

From where Zimmerman was standing when he was on the 911 call, and stated Martin ran and he lost sight of him, which was the back entrance, to where the incident happened, yes, he obviously walked down the sidewalk.

At the same time, however, he was asked where he was at. He did not know his exact address, and with most townhomes in Florida, the addresses are on the outside of each building, presuming the common layout of such. I know this, as I lived in Florida, and when I was young, I solicited newspapers in apartment type buildings and condos such as these. Building numbers are frustratingly not visible from the street most of the time.

This would show on the map he went down the sidewalk to obtain the actual numerical address off the building, then paused walking and said, "Tell them to just meet me at the mailboxes." He struggled multiple times in the call about the "take a left, well not really a left, ugh, it's kind of left", "at the clubhouse", "it's a left past the clubhouse".

Looking at the map explains precisely why he had a hard time trying to explain to them where he was exactly located. The map also shows the girlfriends' home, the direction Martin had run when Zimmerman lost sight of him, and how it would appear that Martin did indeed track back. Yes, like many others, it is a theory, but, Occams Razor.

So, why was he there? In answer to your question, once the operator said "We don't need you to do that" and he replied, "Ok", then was asked, "What is your address where you are at?" he walked down the sidewalk to obtain the numerical address. In the meantime, Martin tracked back, and the incident unfolded exactly as witnessed by Zimmerman.

But then he states he wants the police to call him so he can tell them his location...

See above. He also stated when asked for his own address, "Crap, I don't know where this kid is." which clearly outlines he was acutely aware that he was out in the open and vulnerable. At this point, I think he decided to make a quick beat back to his vehicle, and this is also when he was finishing up the call. Notice I said I think. I outlined above why I felt he wanted to meet at the mailboxes, aside from calling out his personal address and the confusion with explaining the layout of the road. Note from the call, he also did not call out his cell phone number, and the 911 operator caught on to that as well, reading it back.

Unfamiliar neighborhood, at night. Or he turned back and confronted Zimmerman. Or Zimmerman caught up to him. Could be a dozen different reasons.

Exactly. It could even have been the unfamiliarity that lead to him looking around at the buildings like someone that was "up to no good", simply because he was lost.

However, from looking at the map to the point of where Martin ran, where the shooting occured, and the location the girlfriends apartment, the timeline et al, it is sneakingly suspicous that Martin did indeed double back for a showdown.

The theory does make sense and pan out, but again, it is a theory, but a rather sound one. It is also one that does seem to match up with the staements, times, etc.

[That is what Zimmerman claims, but you have no way of knowing that, or stating it as an absolute.

You are perfectly correct in saying that. No one knows what took place in those final moments, but after looking at that map, one has to ask, how the hell did Martin get back to that spot on that sidewalk? Teleportation? It sure wasn't magic, and last I checked I doubt people have the ability to walk through buildings, so it leaves the simple answer that he doubled back and approach Zimmerman from behind as he was headed back up the walk to his truck as he claimed.

It lends credibility to it not being completely innocent either, which then lends credibility to it being confrontational. That's what is called circumstantial evidence. But no, not claiming it is an absolute. Occams Razor again.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:04 AM

Originally posted by Cosmic911
reply to post by Xcathdra

Zimmerman was lawfully in possession of his gun and had the permits required by law in order to carry and conceal it.

Hey X!

I do believe he was in violation of his Neighborhood Watch P&P by carrying a weapon, however, be it gun or knife, or whatever.

However he was acting as a private citizen that night as he was not on Neighborhood Watch patrol. It was clearly stated he was on his way to the store, hence, in his vehicle tending to personal business. We all still have a personal right and reason to be cautious of people in our neighborhoods and not just look the other way when we aren't "working".

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:10 AM

Originally posted by WingedBull

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
I don't need to.

I forgot.

Not listening again. I stated that Zimmerman persued Trayvon. Whether he admitted to persuing Trayvon after the audio tape is irrelevant, this wasn't my initial argument.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
As another member pointed out, in pursuit and following are two different things.

Yes, I'm not sure how you could merely follow somebody who you believe to be running away from you.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Interesting you are accepting some of the 911 tape as fact, and other parts you are rejecting as Zimmerman lying.

I never stated that Zimmerman was completely lying in the audio tape, you are lying about what I said. There are certain parts of the audio transcript that are relevant and certain parts that are not to me. What is the key piece of evidence from the audio tape is the fact that he admits to persuing Trayvon who he feels is running away from him, zimmerman also admits to being highly suspicious of Trayvon, this demonstrates motive. Whether Zimmerman stated that Trayvon walked a certain direction or distance is not as relevant.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
Chase would indicate he was running after Martin, not merely following him.

Again, if Trayvon is running away as Zimmerman says, and Zimmerman strongly suspects he is running away from him, how could Zimmerman simply 'follow' Trayvon? The dispatcher asked him if he was following Trayvon, if the dispatcher said 'are you persuing trayvon', do you really believe that Zimmerman would correct him by saying he was merely following? I don't think so.

Never said it was.

Yes, possibility isn't fact. I'm glad you understand this.

You are making a claim. Back it up.

No I didn't make that claim, so please stop lying about what I said.

I made the point that Zimmerman initially persued Trayvon, didn't refer to any specific point in the audio.

Feel free to go back to my comments, thanks.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:14 AM

Originally posted by WingedBull

Oh, so it's a racial issue. If you think there shouldn't be a rush to judgment, if you don't think facts should be substituted for emotion and speculation, then you are a racist. Got it. Yup, that's rational-thinking.

The fact is that the LEAD DETECTIVE on the case, who interviewed GZ, did not believe his story. That isn't speculation or conjecture. I do believe that the LEAD DETECTIVE, who examined the scene and assessed GZ's account of the events would be in best possible position to make a judgement, wouldn't you?

I think it is extremely rational to posit that if the LEAD DETECTIVE thought GZ was lying, its a very good indication that he was.

That a key member of the rightly-criticized Sanford Police Force actually tried to do the right thing by arresting and charging GZ that very night doesn't get enough play in the media.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:16 AM
I gotta say this, for any eyes, and minds it may interest.

There is one situation, in where you shoot someone, and to quote the movie Road House;

"A man puts a gun in yer face, you got two choices - stand there 'n die or kill the mother#er!"

In no event, do you even pull a gun on an unarmed man!

But i know karma. She's a Nifty Bitch. Justice will prevail.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:27 AM
Before I read all the responses... who are the "officials" and do you not maby think this a ploy. turn himself in and appease the people who are after him? I don't reallly know. I never , ever watch MSM . they smile and laugh through tragedy and pretend while they are reading a screen. Of course they will say and will bring him in..... gotta stop the riots right? but this is top news for the last few months.. hmmm this site has changed so much in the years.... where's art bell when he's needed.... and yes he's relevant because he went beyond this site and the MSMDD (main stream media dumb down)

edit.. i do flip thru and catch the smiling cackling dummies lol
edit on 12-4-2012 by wyogirl11 because: on subject

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:37 AM

Originally posted by yuppa

Originally posted by GmoS719
I'm glad to hear this.
Let's hope he is charged and sentenced to the maximum.
God rest that poor child's soul.

You should never be glad of others misfortune no matter what you think of them. The case will hinge on th ewitnesses being played against each other. One says travon was on top the other says zimmerman. They want to avoid riots and the UN is putting pressure on the prosecutors office to charge him at least with reckless discharge of a fire arm i would assume.

Why is the UN interested in this? Seriously , I don't know... how is this case a world case? now i'm scared... did the LA riots get other "nations" involved? I"m stumped info please

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:43 AM
Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Yes, Zimmerman made claims that Trayvon was running in a certain direction. Whether Trayvon's body was found back from that direction where Zimmerman could account is irrelevant, there is no evidence out there pointing to whether Trayvon confronted Zimmerman himself, aside from Zimmerman's words.

There is no evidence on the confrontation part, this is correct. Not direct, really, it is circumstantial, which may or may not be used in court. That does not discount it not being logical or not, or the simplest answer or not.

You have Martin running to the back entrance of the complex, then magically appearing dead on a sidewalk past a row of buildings he could not just walk through, he had to have circled around, else Zimmerman would have seen him in a frontal confrontation. He would have seen him, in a timely fashion while still on the phone with 911, so logically, he had to have been approached from behind.

This leaves Martin running down the row of buildings, back-tracking up the sidewalk to Zimmerman. That means he passed the girlfriends house. The father was living with the girlfriend. Martin had only one place to go, not to the fathers house. This *was* the fathers house. She has also been portrayed in the media as the "step mother".

The only other possiblity is that at some point in the buildings there is a breezeway where he could have slipped through, but it still led to him coming back to Zimmerman, therefore leading to a logical conclusion that Martin was the confrontational one, else why would he have come back? From the timeline, the length of the call and where Zimmerman lost sight of Martin, there is simply no logical way he could have continued his pursuit and this not been noticeable on the phone as it was when he originally did it. There just wasn't time.

How could it be a fallacy? Zimmerman was certainly prepared to confront by persuing Trayvon initially, maybe Zimmerman saw Trayvon and continued to persue him? What made you assume this scenario was out of the question? Considering you claim it was a 'fallacy' for him to persue him any longer?

I don't buy into that assessment. I followed someone that I was in *no* way ready to confront. You are jumping to a conclusion here. Martin had contacted the police, he knew they were on the way. When he was told, "We don't need you to do that,' he quickly states, "Ok". This does not sound like someone that is looking to be confrontational, he sounded rather agreeable to the situation, in fact.

I called it a fallacy, because as I stated, on the tape, it is clear he is not breathing harder and faster like he was when the operator realized what he was doing, he breathing slowed back down. He didn't need Zimerman to tell him he was following Martin, he instantly knew. He also didn't need Martin to say he stopped following, he instantly knew this too.

His voice flowed effortlessly, and once he loss sight of Martin, you could tell he was rather concentrating on the 911 operator and not on Martin anymore. Not until he realized he was a duck in a barrel standing out in the open like he was. You could almost hear "Oh crap" wash over him when he realized this. His voice once again became stressful as he decided he best get back to his vehicle when he says, "Crap, I have no idea where this kid is."

You can also note that the 911 operator no longer had concerns he was still following Martin, because it was transparent to him as well that Zimmerman had stopped.

Yes, you're assuming he stopped chasing Trayvon after he was advised not to. The audio tape cannot fully account for the entire event, it does however demonstrate what Zimmerman was prepared to do.

No, I am basing it off of a very logical conclusion after listening to the 911 call and listening to the changes in his voice, the motion of the phone from when he was running and you can tell he stopped, and the stress in his voice from when he was running and when he stopped. I do not think it demonstrates anything other than Zimmerman wanted to keep an eye on Martin until the police arrived, because he wanted them to be able to apprehend him.

Again, I have done this, in a vehicle, behind a drunk driver, on the phone with 911. I watched the driver hit another car, followed him for several miles as he left the scene, all the while reporting on location. I was in no way willing to confront, even once the driver stopped and 3 passengers bailed.

Why must he go home? Maybe he had a last minute change of plans? Maybe he wanted to go back to his dad's place to get something else?

This was the dads place/girlfriends, as outlined above. I asked simply because of Martins gf's testimony. If he was afraid, why not go home?

Why go back to Zimmerman?

edit on 12-4-2012 by Libertygal because: error in a name

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:54 AM
reply to post by shepseskaf

Not at all. It's been scientifically proven that people are only able to detect lies about 50% of the time, even if they're "trained" in lie detection.

Human lie detectors have not much greater than chance statistics at detecting lies on others.

For some additional reading:

So by stating that the lead detective should be an expert at detecting lies is quite untrue and something that only happens in hollywood.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 04:55 AM

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
All this is going to do is postpone the riots. Whether he's found guilty of anything or not, there will be riots. Sad, sad state of America.

Imagine if he's found not guilty!

It would be a very similar spark that caused the LA riots in '92.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:05 AM
reply to post by antonia

If that is how you feel, Then wouldn't most adults have conducted themselves by saying "excuse me but I am new to the community visiting my dad, He lives in apartment 123 could you point me in the right direction" Rather than instigating things? Before you say Zimmerman had no right, remember he was the appointed watch captain!

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:06 AM
I've refrained from commenting on this issue for awhile, but can't any longer.

The hypocritical behavior of this nation is amazing; people wanting to be vigilantes on a issue, that was caused by a guy being a vigilante.

Just absurd, and everyone that's calling for "justice" for Zimmerman falls into that of being a hypocrite.
edit on 12-4-2012 by Evil_Santa because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:09 AM
Originally posted by pizzanazi75

1. No one said they were required to do anything. Like ATS likes to say 'pics or it didn't happen'. Im sticking with that.

You just did. Unless you equate yourself to no one?

2. Do you think the EMT's moved his body 180 degrees so his head was facing the houses and his feet were facing the concrete? Or do you think they just rolled him over where he was and did CPR? They would have rolled him over. And the cop noted the position of the body when he arrived, so even if the body was moved, the cop reported where it was. Witnesses reported seeing where it was. So your argument isn't valid.

All I know is that when CPR is performed, the body must be in a certain position. I do not know the lay of the land, if he was somewhat uphill, downhill, or on a left or rightwards slant. Nor do you. My argument will continue to be vaild until it is shown in court where the corpse was located at the time of *death*, and all the facts are laid out as to how the incident unfolded.

You, nor anyone else knows if he died instantly, tried to get to his feet and stumbled before falling to the ground, etc. Most people do not just drop dead like on television when they get shot. In fact, it can take a little time to die, and it can be gruesome.

Until then, neither of us knows. So, my argument is still valid. You don't know. You can't seem to handle that, can you? You just aren't going to get it all on the innarwebs.

4. You make alot of excuses for a man who just murdered an unarmed teenager. I have reported facts as they are known and asked questions to try and find answers. You have blindly accepted the words of a child killer. Ill stay on my side. Not to mention, audio experts agree Zimmerman was not the one yelling. That is why it didn't continue. He never yelled for help that night. I trust science more than I trust a child killer.

I don't make excuses for anyone. I haven't blindly accepted anything. I simply point out what little facts are known, and point to logical conclusions based on circumstantial evidence. That really is all there is, circumstantial evidence and the words of people, including Zimmerman, that you have no idea if you can trust or not. Why do you "blindly" accept their words, as well? But, with what little evidence there is, his claims do amazingly match up.

A lot more than your emotional rantings outlined above. Like I said, I don't take "sides" Guess you missed that part in the emotional fog of pointing fingers and calling names, though. But, it's ok, label me however you like, my words speak for themselves, and I am proud of the stance I have taken. The legal, non-emotional stance that believes in justice for all.

5. How do you know he can trust his new lawyer. Seems you are making alot of assumption about people you don't know. Just wow.

Because he hired him, as opposed to the other two he did not.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:17 AM
AND Again! Why is the UN involved???????????????? United Nations? is that is what was referred way back in the posts? I'm really curious

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:18 AM
reply to post by Libertygal

1. Is that all you could come up with?

2. Don't talk about things you admittedly don't know about. I do know where the body was. It has been reported. If you followed this case you would know that.

3. Alot of facts are known, you are choosing to ignore them to defend a child killer. You can keep say emotional this and that, it doesn't change the facts or the case or how little you know about it or the fact that you are making all types of assumptions to fit your 'facts' to defend a child killer.

4. He let the others speak for him. You can call that what you want. Still doesn't change the fact you don't know if he trust his new lawyer or not, your assuming that.

posted on Apr, 12 2012 @ 05:36 AM

Originally posted by shepseskaf

Originally posted by Libertygal
Zimmerman refused to be transported by ambulance to the hospital that night. Ever heard of liquid stitches? EMTs use those a lot.

LMFAO!! Liquid stitches? Is this the level absurdity that has been reached in the search for plausible reasons why neither GZ's appearance or demeanor matches the the concoction of lies he made up that night?

Dermabond is a medical adhesive for the skin that is used in place of sutures to close wounds and incisions. While forming a strong, flexible bond that is gentler and more comfortable than sutures, it also creates a protective barrier that seals out most common infection-causing bacteria. Incisions can be closed 3-5 times faster than suturing and Dermabond simply disappears as the wound heals—leaving no stitches to be removed. Sterile, single-use ampules with chisel-tip for fine line or wide applications. Manufactured by ETHICON, a division of Johnson & Johnson.

February 14, 2008
Liquid Gel Bandage Gets FDA Approval

Researchers at Rutgers University have created a liquid bandage for use in the field and say that it is appropriate for use in combat situations. The FDA released the product for marketing and called it similar to other liquid bandage products on the market.

How do you know what his appearance or demeanor should have been? Do you know him personally? Seen him on video before? Seen the photos of the wounds that were taken?



I think we can wait for the ET report and photos in court, don't you? Instead of judging people for having rational opinions?

Talk about absurdity...

new topics

top topics

<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in