Bloody new photo of Trayvon Martin's killer

page: 17
36
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian


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.


Why would his suspension from school (that he was serving at the time) have no bearing on the incident but you keep bringing up things from Zimmerman's past and claim they have bearing on the incident. Everything we do in life is cumulative to our present being. Martin's suspension was very much a factor in the situation. Without being suspended, he wouldn't have been where he was to start with. Do you not know the entire story?




posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Kernalized
 



That's a big IF


Then it shouldn't be too hard to answer it? It wasn't hard for me to answer your "big IF", so?

Would you still be defending Zimmerman?



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by Kernalized
 



That's a big IF


Then it shouldn't be too hard to answer it? It wasn't hard for me to answer your "big IF", so?

Would you still be defending Zimmerman?


If he was guilty, no. Since he isn't, why are you NOT defending him?



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Kernalized
 



Why would his suspension from school (that he was serving at the time) have no bearing on the incident


Well why would it?

Does him smoking marijuana mean that he is an aggressive person?
Does him being caught with graffiti mean he was up to something that night?

What's relevant is what Trayvon was up to that night when Zimmerman reported him, and evidence points to nothing. "Suspicion" is not evidence of anything. Whether he was suspended in school in the past does not mean he needed to be shot that night, it doesn't mean he was guilty of doing anything that night. It has no bearing.


but you keep bringing up things from Zimmerman's past


Actually, not once did I mention Zimmerman's past in this thread.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 

Look you are proposing things that evidence does not support which is not what ATS is about.

As far as you saying I am just a guy that doesn’t know how to deduce from logic is completely false. You have no idea what my background is so don’t make false assumptions.




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


Where am I lying show me? Tell what part of the taped reenactment, statements, or recording lead you to believe otherwise? You say I don’t know anything. Sir/Mam I beg to differ this case has had a huge amount of the evidence on display for a very long time and I have been to the scene to see with my own eyes. So will you please stop trying to muddy the waters on this? If you have evidence showing your own version please allow all of us to see it.

I have already provided the links in this thread which shows everything I have talked about. Provide your links which show otherwise.


edit on 4-12-2012 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Kernalized
 



If he was guilty, no.


Was that so hard now? Great, we agree on something.


Since he isn't, why are you NOT defending him?


But he's not innocent because we all know he shot Trayvon. He is legally innocent, but there are many questions and there is an ongoing investigation.
edit on 4-12-2012 by Southern Guardian because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


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.

Criminal justice is not about proving innocence, legal or otherwise. It is only about proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Do you feel there is enough evidence to prove that George is guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, of murder? If so, what degree of murder, and what evidence would that decision be based on?

See ya,
Milt



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Kernalized
 


my point exactly, he was engulfed with fear as you stated and his new born baby emotions made his decisions, not a clear adult mind. i saw the pics and as i stated before, wasn't as bad as people make it out to be. a fight is a fight, not a reason to kill someone. im not defending the kid im sure his actions were that of a typical punk kid. even though no one will know exactly what happened since one witness is the killer and the other witness is dead its highly unlikely this kid was going to commit murder. zimmerman being the adult should have done the right thing and walked away, instead he grabs the gun and shots him over a brawl. like i said before zimmerman is a coward, and it was bad form to kill over a fight.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
Look you are proposing things that evidence does not support which is not what ATS is about.


I disagree. ATS is about questioning the unknown. The exact events of the incident involving Trayvon and Zimmerman are unknown to all of us here because none of us were there. You've already made the assumption that Trayvon was the one that started the confrontation, something that is yet to proven. You source your claim from Zimmerman's own testimony. This isn't denying ignorance sorry.

Most ATSers believe Zimmerman to be innocent, but nobody here can personally account for his innocence in all this. You can make as many diagrams as you want on that map but in the end it doesn't change the key fact here, that you weren't there to see who started the confrontation.


You have no idea what my background is


.....and I don't care to. Coming from your posts, it's clear you don't have much of background in matters like these.


Where am I lying


You lied when you claimed that Trayvon started the confrontation, when it should be rather clear by now that there is no proof he did.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnInFL
reply to post by Trustfund
 


"Trayvon was 17 years old, he was a kid and still in high school. I could careless (sic) what he looked like, age is all that matters. "
And if he F'd your sister and killed her - you would feel still feel that 'age is all that matters'.
And if he had you on the ground bashing your head into concrete, you would feel the same?

Zimmerman was protecting his neighborhood after Multiple break-ins by criminals. Martin was kicked out of school for bringing drugs - what a piece of work. This is a case where Martin tried to play Thug and picked the wrong fight.

He got EXACTLY what he deserved.




How the hell you know Trayvon wasn't defending himself from a guy following him?

Martin was suspended for having a bag which previously held drugs. Since we're at it, Zimmerman has previous arrests, not juvenile handslaps, but ARRESTS. He also has former co-workers stating he was a bully.

To wrap it all up, he got his arse kicked by a 17 year old kid and had to shoot him to save face...or keep from being killed
as he puts it. Which makes him a fairy in my book. It will all wash out though, he will get his arse kicked again rather in prison or on the street.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kernalized

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.




What makes it such a big IF to you...because Trayvon is black? Thanks for letting your colors show.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by BenReclused
Do you feel there is enough evidence to prove that George is guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, of murder?


In terms of evidence at this moment? No, I think this case deserves more attention as while there is no evidence proving that Trayvon started the confrontation, the same can be said for Zimmerman. Personally I believe that Zimmerman is guilty of second degree murder because I personally believe he started the confrontation, but I'd much prefer investigations to continue for sometime as I think there are still many parts of the case that require more attention.

Zimmerman clearly believed Trayvon was up to no good and clearly got out to pursue him (Zimmerman stated that Trayvon was running away from him). Zimmerman had a loaded gun with him so he was clearly prepared to get himself into some conflict. I think given the fact Trayvon's DNA is yet to be traced on Zimmerman's gun or clothing (it's inconclusive) I don't buy the claim from Zimmerman that he shot trayvon during the physical confrontation. I think it was afterwards. I think Zimmerman was beaten in a fight, this destroyed Zimmerman pride, then when Trayvon walked away, Zimmerman shot him.

I don't think Zimmerman deserves life in prison, but I believe he deserves time to think about what he did. 10 years I think would be good, atleast. Although I highly doubt he'd be found guilty anyway.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Seen air-head on other threads.

Has been accused of being a paid shill by many.

Never has anything good to say. Ignore or bombard (what ever you choose) and it will go away.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trustfund
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Trayvon was 17 years old, he was a kid and still in high school. I could careless what he looked like, age is all that matters.
Wrong. Flat out, wrong. Age matters when you are talking about an adult killing a 5 year-old. But, a 17 year-old, grown teenager who is only considered a child because of an arbitrary line of demarcation? Bull. Trayvon may have been a legal child, but he wasn't in any other way.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 





You lied when you claimed that Trayvon started the confrontation, when it should be rather clear by now that there is no proof he did.


The proof should be clear and simple the proximity to his vehicle the marks on Martins fists the fact that Martin had left the area and then came back is all you should need to deduce that Martin came back and instigated the altercation however there is more but you have yet to say what part of the evidence does not match up. This site is about denying ignorance but you repeatedly tried to spread it.

If you can’t point out what does not match up to Zimmerman’s statements, the recordings, or reenactment then I doubt you have even reviewed it all and like many you are making statements without even trying reviewing the available evidence. The reason I say this is there is one thing that sticks out to me however the only way you would know is if you actually looked.

Your assumptions about my background are so far off if you knew you would be ashamed but think what you want I just hope you actually look at all the information at some point.

Anyway the conversation is old you are like a broken record with you don’t know you weren’t there rinse and repeat dialog. If you can’t figure out what happened with this much evidence and information then you do not have the capacity too.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by eNumbra
17 is not an adult just for clarification's sake.


at 13 you become a man in jewish tradition
at 16(typically) is when age of consent laws begin saying its okay to have sex
at 17 you can see an R rated movie by yourself
at 18 you can vote, be sent to war, post pictures of yourself having sex
at 19 you can smoke
at 21 you can drink


17 is not an adult.
...BUT at 13, you can be charged as an adult.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trustfund
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


He's gonna post statistics that say black people are more likely to be serial killers. Been here done this.

If there is one (1) thing I have learned, that is that those who address race the most, are usually the most racist...



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 

Thank you for your sincere, and well thought out response. Due to very poor vision, and similar typing skills, it will take me a while to compose the "in kind" response that you deserve. Also, it's getting fairly late here, so it will likely be later tomorrow before I get it posted.

See ya,
Milt

PS:
One of your stars is from me.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by eNumbra
Not saying he didn't bring it on himself, but stop calling him an adult.


Then it is just as reasonable to ask the other poster to refrain from using the highly emotive phrase "Child Killer" when referring to Zimmerman, as he's doing so entirely to elicit sympathy for an infant and in doing so is skewing the perspective.

The physical attributes Trayvon were not that of a pre-pubescent child as he wants to portray.

For all intent and purpose, he had a manly stature. It's hogwash to claim he was a child and therefore his death is any more unjust than it was, simply due to the pedantic legalities defining the age of an adult.

And it's a cop out, plain and simple. Everyone can see it is.



posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I have not been following the case at all to be honest. I still think this man is at fault however, simply because of his actions that night. This entire scenario was completely avoidable, but through this man's actions, the man who got killed felt threatened, and therefore may or may not have initiated violence. He did not however initiate the confrontation. The person who is still alive is the one who initiated the confrontation. The cops were on the way, the dispatcher told him not to pursue the person, yet he did anyway. If someone were following me in that manner, I would likely have thought something bad was about to happen to me, and who knows what I would have done. Therefore those who are saying that Zimmerman was in the right are completely wrong.





new topics
top topics
 
36
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join


ATS Live Radio Presents - Bushcraft On Fire Radio ***On The AIR !!! ***
read more: Bushcraft On Fire Radio : 04/17/2014: Basic Packs, More on Police Encounters and PLANTS!!!!