Bloody new photo of Trayvon Martin's killer

I have been followed before while I was walking down the street. On at least 5 occassions. Each time I felt like I was in danger. So I understand what Trayvon must have felt. I am a female so I chose the safest reaction by going into a crowded business to escape the creep following me.
I was terrified that I was about to be abducted. The situation I experienced weren't normal situations where a man might flirt with a woman. I'm talking perverts and the whole creepy, rapist serial killer factor.

Really you all talking crap that you wouldn't feel threatened by a stranger following you are lying and are being good sheep.

Originally posted by Domo1
For all the people that are going to descend on this thread and say Zimmerman acted as the aggressor, following someone is not illegal, neither is asking them what they're doing. Neither of those things warrants physical assault, and it's clear Zimmerman suffered that. The only real question is if he feared for his life, and only he can answer that, and he has. Start banging my head against the ground and I'm going to shoot you too.

Zimmerman made some poor choices, but none of them were illegal.

He was harrassing the kid cause he was black. He shoulda stood down like the cops told him to. He's a punk.

reply to post by Trustfund

Um, hispanics can't be racist towards black people?

Sure they can. I just wonder why you seem to feel they MUST be.

See ya,
Milt

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Yes my opinion based on the facts and the testimony

Testimony is not fact. Opinions are not fact, There is no evidence pointing to Trayvon having started the confrontation, none.

I believe Zimmerman is innocent and it is my opinion his account of what happened is truthful

You are more than welcome to have your opinions.

Originally posted by Kernalized
In this country, you are innocent until proven guilty.

In this country you are legally innocent until proven guilty. Being legally innocent of a crime does not mean that you didn't do it. Talk to O.J about being found legally innocent of a crime. Trayvon hasn't been found guilty of anything either, he is also legally innocent of what had happened that night at this point, regardless of whether he is a alive or not.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

There is no evidence pointing to Trayvon having started the confrontation, none.

Since you do not take into account location, proximity, bruises, cuts, lacerations, audio record of the calls, Zimmerman’s phone where he dialed 911, as evidence or fact sure come to any conclusion you want.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Trayvon hasn't been found guilty of anything either, he is also legally innocent of what had happened that night at this point, regardless of whether he is a alive or not.

I may be wrong but I do not think they put dead people on trial so your point about Martin doesn’t make much sense. Wasn’t he expelled from school for something illegal?

reply to post by BenReclused

Would you choose to use it if someone was bashing your head against a concrete sidewalk? Would that person's race make any difference in that choice?

Why would somebody be bashing my head in first place?

Was it because I made verbal threats to them?
Was it because I put my hand on their shoulder and told them that they were coming with me?
Was it because I attacked them first? So maybe they were defending themselves?

In either case I'd defend myself, but just because I'm trying get myself out of that situation does not mean I am innocent of any wrong doing or any instigation.

It could be that they are bashing my head because they wanted to steal something from me. In that case I'd be a victim. Zimmerman claims he is the victim. Nobody here can prove that he really was. Nobody here was there that night.

hmm...

reply to post by Grimpachi

Since you do not take into account location, proximity, bruises, cuts,

Location? Do you know exactly what Zimmerman's movements were that night aside from his own claims? You don't. We have witnesses claiming they saw a fight, but nobody can account for Zimmerman's exact movements prior to the conflict.

As for his bruises and cuts, having those does not automatically make him the victim, it does not prove that Trayvon was the aggressor. It merely proves that Zimmerman was in a fight, something we all know.

Originally posted by Grimpachi
I may be wrong but I do not think they put dead people on trial so your point about Martin doesn’t make much sense. Wasn’t he expelled from school for something illegal?

Yep, he had an empty marijuana bag and he was expelled? So? Does this mean he is an aggressive male that started the fight with Zimmerman? Or does this add little to nothing to this case? Clearly you haven't experienced high school or college before or am I wrong?

What's next? Are you going to point to his hoodie as more evidence that he is guilty?

reply to post by Southern Guardian

There is no evidence pointing to Trayvon having started the confrontation, none.

The confrontation didn't happen until after the 911 call, so where's the evidence that George started it? That's what it SHOULD require to disprove his self defense claim.

See ya,
Milt

Originally posted by Kernalized
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

There is evidence that Martin started the fight, there is Zimmerman's testimony. You may not like it, but it's evidence.
If Zimmerman was breaking the law, he wouldn't have been on the phone to the police to start with. They knew him, he was talking to them. That's because he is the head of the neighborhood watch and has been doing it for some time now.
News reports have said there was training for the neighborhood watch. He also tried out to be a police officer, you don't walk in off the street and try out, you go through a training program first. He had training.
He was also an adult who was doing well enough in life to live in a gated community so he must have been somewhat successful which involves decision making ability.
He kept the police informed of his actions as he went, you don't do that if you are planning to kill someone.
It doesn't matter if you accept Zimmerman's testimony or not, it only matters if the court and the jury accept it. Regardless of how you feel about it, his testimony is evidence.

It's [the liar] Zimmerman's word that Martin struck first.

The girl who last talked with Trayvon, who was later identified by the Martin family attorney as Trayvon's girlfriend, told Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda that she and Trayvon talked on the phone daily and had known each other since Kindergarten. The girl told the prosecutor that she and Trayvon talked on and off as he went to the store to buy a snack. She said Trayvon told her he took shelter from the rain under an overhang while walking back to his father's girlfriend's home. Minutes later, she said, Trayvon told her a white man in a vehicle was watching him. Trayvon started walking, and the call cut off, she said. When she called back, "he said he's walking, and he said this man is still following him." The girl said Trayvon started running, "and then, he said he lost him [Zimmerman]," she said, adding that the teen's "voice kind of changed...I could tell he was scared." The girl said she told Trayvon to keep running, but "he said he ain't gonna run. He said he's right by his father's house." "And in a couple minutes, he said a man's following him again, he's behind him," she said. "I say, 'run.'" She said Trayvon was breathing hard. She said Trayvon asked "Why are you following me for?" and a man's voice said, "What are you doing around here?" Then, she heard a noise and the call cut off.

Read more: globalgrind.com...

Her statements show that Zimmerman was following Trayvon,, Trayvon lost him then Zimmerman found him again. This is where Trayvon's phone cut off.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Kernalized
In this country, you are innocent until proven guilty.

In this country you are legally innocent until proven guilty. Being legally innocent of a crime does not mean that you didn't do it. Talk to O.J about being found legally innocent of a crime. Trayvon hasn't been found guilty of anything either, he is also legally innocent of what had happened that night at this point, regardless of whether he is a alive or not.

And if he were alive, he could be in court. If he had killed Zimmerman while casing the houses, would you still be defending him?

reply to post by BenReclused

The confrontation didn't happen until after the 911 call, so where's the evidence that George started it?

I never stated that there was evidence pointing to Zimmerman starting the confrontation. I did state however that there's no evidence pointing to Trayvon having started the confrontation which is what many people have been claiming here.

That's what it SHOULD require to disprove his self defense claim.

I think Zimmerman will be let off because of the lack of evidence proving that he started the confrontation, but I disagree on the argument that he is innocent because of that reason. He may be legally innocent, but that's not one in the same as actually being innocent of a crime.

Seeya,

SG.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Actually I am just bringing to light his past and I was thinking more along the lines of the burglary tools and stolen property. Sorry but that isn’t supposed to be part of growing up but more along the lines of a career. From what I understand it wasn’t his first time being expelled. I don’t care if he was a pothead.

The other thing about the evidence you have to take it all into count to get a full picture and location would refer to the proximity to his vehicle unless you still think he chased him in circles then let him hit him before overpowering him to the ground without scraping or hitting Martin then shooting him making sure martin was on top of him.

I know I know you are going to say no one knows you weren’t there.. blah blah blah. I wonder how cases are ever solved without someone being there.

Some people call it forensic science, logical deduction, detective work, but is a lot easier when you have a firsthand account from someone which they have and it is considered evidence whether you consider it to be or not because it can be held against him if it is found to be false. It is a double edge sword which every indication shows it swinging towards Martin.

Originally posted by Kernalized
And if he were alive, he could be in court. If he had killed Zimmerman while casing the houses, would you still be defending him?

No of course not, if it was proven that he was guilty because of all this then should serve time. If Zimmerman was actually the aggressor and Trayvon was merely defending himself that night, would you still be defending Zimmerman?

I hope we can atleast agree on something for once Kern.

reply to post by Gridrebel

Her statements show that Zimmerman was following Trayvon,, Trayvon lost him then Zimmerman found him again. This is where Trayvon's phone cut off.

Hummm...:
That would indicate that Trayvon may have hit George with the phone in his hand, and would certainly explain the damage to George's nose. Is that evidence that Trayvon did, indeed, attack George first?

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by Grimpachi

Actually I am just bringing to light his past and I was thinking more along the lines of the burglary tools and stolen property

What source do you have for this? An impartial source thank you,

His suspension from school has no bearing on the incident that happened that night, it doesn't excuse the killing, it doesn't automatically mean that Zimmerman is innocent.

The other thing about the evidence you have to take it all into count to get a full picture and location would refer to the proximity to his vehicle unless you still think he chased him in circles

Look Grim, you're not a detective, you're just some guy on the internet interpreting what happened that night, and you're taking most of sources from Zimmerman himself. You are spreading false information by claiming Trayvon started the confrontation when you know nothing of that night. This is not what ATS is suppose to be about.

I know I know you are going to say no one knows you weren’t there

No you weren't, so stop lying about what Trayvon did that night when you don't know anything that lead to the incident.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Kernalized
And if he were alive, he could be in court. If he had killed Zimmerman while casing the houses, would you still be defending him?

No of course not, if it was proven that he was guilty because of all this then should serve time. If Zimmerman was actually the aggressor and Trayvon was merely defending himself that night, would you still be defending Zimmerman?

I hope we can atleast agree on something for once Kern.

That's a big IF, and very unlikely.

IF frogs had wings, they wouldn't have to bump their rears on the ground.

reply to post by Grimpachi


I found a good source regarding the stolen property by the way:

Instead the officer reported he found women’s jewelry and a screwdriver that he described as a “burglary tool,” according to a Miami-Dade Schools Police report obtained by The Miami Herald. Word of the incident came as the family’s lawyer acknowledged that the boy was suspended in February for getting caught with an empty bag with traces of marijuana, which he called “irrelevant” and an attempt to demonize a victim.

Read more here: www.miamiherald.com...

Apparently he wasn't suspended for it, but he was suspended for graffiti and marijuana. He wasn't expelled at all.

Frankly this doesn't change the fact that he was not committing anything illegal that night. People sit here and claim what he "may" or "could" have been up, but the fact remains that he was not breaking the law that night when Zimmerman was reported him.