It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Travyon Martin Parents Settle Wrongful Death Claim for Over One Million Dollars

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 

regarding this incident, it doesn't matter who was 'standing their ground', as that isn't the defense of this case.

do you randomly assault someone just because they are following you ??


Isn't it more likely that he didn't go for SYG immunity because his legal team know that TM would be entitled to that same standard were he still alive?
NO, not from what i've read, heard or reviewed.
(besides, that isn't what 'SYG' is about, anyway)


The only proof that TM initiated any attack is the not-so reliable evidence given by the man who killed him.
evidence that you've seen doesn't necessarily reflect what the lawyers and prosecutors or HOA lawyers know.

remember, the girlfriend already lied so her story isn't exactly 'reliable evidence' either.
for all we know, she could have heard TM state his intent to 'confront' Z and that info alone would alleviate the HOA from any responsibility.

as far as i'm concerned, that's the risk of foolishly attacking any stranger on the street ... actions have consequences, always have.

why do folks like yourself dismiss the opportunity TM had to communicate before getting physical ? apparently, both of them were on their cell phones, communicating with someone else, why was communicating with each other sooooo unreasonable ?



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by verylowfrequency
 


The settlement was made because clearly the HA condoned both current and prior actions of Zimmerman by allowing him to continue his operations.
do tell, what right do you think the HOA has to prevent their residents from strolling the streets ?? even lawfully armed ?



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


I can get why some people are defending Z's "innocent until proven guilty" status re the illegal killing of TM, but what I don't get is how anyone can defend his behaviour up to the moment he ended contact with the NEN, and try and claim they were the actions of a reasonable man?


...and what I personally don't get is why you lack basic reading skills. I didn't even defend Z. All I did was saying that as a resident of a community, he had the right to take a stroll at night, for any reason, same as I do where I live. It's the US of A, you know. Of course this didn't stop you from trolling.


The old "I disagree with you, hence, you're a troll" tactic. Wow, how did I not see that coming? If you're not defending him, you aren't exactly objectively criticising his actions, are you? In fact, you're all for Z and those with similar mindsets, strolling around the neighbourhood and harrassing anyone they deem looks out of place.


Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
Almost everything he did that night prior to killing TM could be put in a Neighbourhood Watch "What NOT To Do!" manual


OK, it probably wasn't in the manual, and I'm not defending Z's mistakes. But it was ultimately Trevor Martin, who had a penchant for using violence, who triggered this situation, unless it was fake blood in Z's cranium. Sometimes karma gets you, you know...
edit on 9-4-2013 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)


Karma has a date with George when he gets on the general population wing of jail, if he doesn't take the cowards way out beforehand.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


I have access to the same information any other interested person has access to.
i seriously doubt that unless you're a resident here


so, in your infinite wisdom, what facts do think you have that haven't made their way to the central media groups or the public in general ??

None. Just those available to everyone else with an internet connection, and the ability to sift the wheat from the chaff.

Originally posted by Honor93
do you know the amount actually agreed upon ? doubt it.
do you realize that the phone conversation (girlfriend on phone) was misrepresented to authorities ?
are you aware that the girlfriend subsequently lied to avoid participating further ?
are you aware that SYG isn't the defense being presented in this case ?

1. No. Never claimed I did.
2. Is that according to those trustworthy msm providers, or was you sat in on the interview?
3. Evidence, please?
4. Yes. Doesn't mean the prosecution can't bring up TM's SYG rights, had Z left him paralysed, instead of dead.

Originally posted by Honor93
and do you realize that if the 'self-defense' argument prevails then the HOA wouldn't be held to any liability, financial or otherwise, however, they may have chose to settle merely to avoid the bad press and pending threats of violence between now and then ?

They are a bunch of moral cowards then, if they are willing to pay out on a bogus claim just to avoid conflict. If they believe Z did no wrong and they were clear of any liability, giving in to possible intimidation and threats of violence isn't a very honorable standard of operating.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 

regarding this incident, it doesn't matter who was 'standing their ground', as that isn't the defense of this case.

do you randomly assault someone just because they are following you ??

On a dark night, in an area with no other people in sight, if anyone puts themselves within arms reach of me without stating their intentions clearly, a punch is the minimum they are going to get. All the indications are that Z was trying to keep up with TM, not the other way round.


Originally posted by Honor93
remember, the girlfriend already lied so her story isn't exactly 'reliable evidence' either.
for all we know, she could have heard TM state his intent to 'confront' Z and that info alone would alleviate the HOA from any responsibility.

Seems they weren't as confident as you about the lack of integrity of this witness.

Originally posted by Honor93
as far as i'm concerned, that's the risk of foolishly attacking any stranger on the street ... actions have consequences, always have.

And now George is facing the consequences of his own.

Originally posted by Honor93
why do folks like yourself dismiss the opportunity TM had to communicate before getting physical ? apparently, both of them were on their cell phones, communicating with someone else, why was communicating with each other sooooo unreasonable ?

You could ask Z that question. I'm sure the prosecution would love to, if he'd put himself on the stand. Z was the adult in this situation. He had all the way from Frank Taafe's house to the point where TM allegedly assaulted him, to let TM know that he was just a well-intentioned neighbour. This was a guy who earned a crust providing security at parties, so you'd expect him to have at least a little experience in deflating potentially hostile situations, and also to be able to fend for himself without a weapon, if any of them got unruly. Kind of goes with the territory.

But, he seems to have lost that gig after getting a bit physical with a female party-goer, so maybe, like neighbourhood watching, he wasn't really cut out for that, either?



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
The old "I disagree with you, hence, you're a troll" tactic. Wow, how did I not see that coming? If you're not defending him, you aren't exactly objectively criticising his actions, are you?


This is the second gap in logic on you part, within two pages of the forum. You said I was defending him, this was demonstrably false, now you DEMAND that I criticize him, while I was speaking of something plain and different?


In fact, you're all for Z and those with similar mindsets, strolling around the neighbourhood and harrassing anyone they deem looks out of place.


Wow, are you a psychic? If yes, you are not very good at that. I'm not "for Z and those with similar mindsets". You are making things up as you go, and it just doesn't look pretty. Pushing your agenda at any cost (including credibility) never does.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 

i thought you said that you reviewed ALL available info ??
guess not, eh ?
this is only one of many sources, pick one that suits you.

source
prosecutors had to make the embarrassing admission that one of their main witnesses, Trayvon Martin’s girlfriend, told a lie during her testimony.
- snip -
She also previously claimed that after hearing the shooting over Martin’s phone, she was hospitalized for trauma. But prosecutors had to admit the hospitalization wasn’t true—an admission the defense lawyers will surely use to question her credibility on the phone conversation.

When reporters asked the state’s lead prosecutor, Bernie de la Rionda, whether he intended to charge the 19-year-old Miami teen with perjury, he ambiguously said, ”You can all read the law and make your own decision.”

The woman had said she was in the hospital on the day of Martin’s funeral, but ”In fact, she lied,” defense attorney Don West said.
so, why should anyone trust her or her false testimony ??

um, yes it does.
hypotheticals do not playout well in a court of law.

and, if TM was the aggressor, he had no 'SYG' argument of any kind.
since Zs wife is being prosecuted for lying about their income resources, why shouldn't the girlfriend be prosecuted for her lies ??



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 

this thread isn't about the business practices of the HOA.
nice deflection though.


On a dark night, in an area with no other people in sight, if anyone puts themselves within arms reach of me without stating their intentions clearly, a punch is the minimum they are going to get. All the indications are that Z was trying to keep up with TM, not the other way round.
try that on my block and you'll endure a similar fate.
we talk to each other, first.
TM should have tried it.


Seems they weren't as confident as you about the lack of integrity of this witness.
obviously they are or they wouldn't be contemplating charges of perjury


yes, he is.
under prejudice, duress and threats of extreme violence.
i wonder if we should treat the other participants, equally ??

your hyperbole is just that, not facts.
either one of them could have taken the higher ground and offered a greeting ... seems that wasn't a lesson TM ever learned.

wrong thread for such a question so i defer to the Topic of this one.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Honor93
 



Did what she told a lie about have ANY relevance to the events of that evening, and how she perceived them? Were her lies made in a courtroom? No? That's likely why she isn't being prosecuted. That, and the likelihood that her lies have no relevance to this case unless they were specifically about the events she was asked to recount..



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Karma has a date with George when he gets on the general population wing of jail, if he doesn't take the cowards way out beforehand.


Zimmerman is going to walk. There is no way he knew he was confronting a 17 year old, Martin had the looks and size of a 20+ year old. There was a fight, Zimmerman had injuries and a medical record. The police were right not to charge Zimmerman, the only reason he is facing a trial is because Obama and Holder over stepped their boundaries to make another gun control case(imho).

Do your homework on what kind of kid Martin was, he was found by his school officials with the tools of a thief if I recall correctly. I may upset people on writing this, but my opinion on this is Martin was a punk kid who got violent when Zimmerman confronted him. Zimmerman had no legal obligation to stand down, as a result of the confrontation he used deadly force against a young man. His justification for using deadly force was good enough for the initial investigation and the case should have ended there, instead we have a circus where a punk kid is made out to be an innocent victim of a gun crime.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 

possibly, are you privy to her thoughts on the matter ?


Were her lies made in a courtroom? No?
sworn statements (like the one she gave) hold the same weight as being under oath in a courtroom.

her prosecution hasn't been decided, as of yet.

as is for most 19yr olds, if they can get away with one lie, they will certainly try again.
so, who's to say ANY of her story is even remotely true ?



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


On a dark night, in an area with no other people in sight, if anyone puts themselves within arms reach of me without stating their intentions clearly, a punch is the minimum they are going to get. All the indications are that Z was trying to keep up with TM, not the other way round.
try that on my block and you'll endure a similar fate.

Fortunately for me, I don't live on your block, but if you mean I'd end up with a similar fate to TM, I beg to differ in opinion. Unlike Trayvon, I know how to do some effective ground and pound, and Z would never have got his hands on his gun, unless he had it out before I attacked him.

Originally posted by Honor93
we talk to each other, first.

That's nice, but we're not talking about people who act reasonably, we're talking about someone who might follow a person in his vehicle for 100's of yards and then get out to "see which way they went," despite knowing exactly which way he went because he'd just seen him take a turn down an unlit pathway. If THAT person keeps on walking towards me, even if I've moved aside so I'm not blocking his path, THAT guy is going on his ass the moment he gets within reach. Sorry, but that's just how I roll. Deal with it.

Originally posted by Honor93
TM should have tried it.

He did. He asked Z why he was following him and Z responded with a question of his own, if you believe DD's version of events, or he hid with murderous intentions but still gave Z a head's up before he attacked, if you believe Z's..



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by verylowfrequency
 


The settlement was made because clearly the HA condoned both current and prior actions of Zimmerman by allowing him to continue his operations.
do tell, what right do you think the HOA has to prevent their residents from strolling the streets ?? even lawfully armed ?



That's the point I was trying to make on the previous page, unfortunately I baited a troll.

How on Earth can an association, a perfectly civic organization living by simple rules and bylaws, impose a curfew on one or many of the residents? I mean, seriously? It's simply idiotic to suggest that they can. That's not North Korea, where the village committee would easily declare a curfew at will, or check your residence for prohibited items, and screw the court. We have freedoms here, and I think that's swell.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 


Does your homework include evidence that TM was prone to bouts of intense violence on complete strangers? Does your homework on Z indicate the possibility that he just might have tried to make a grab for a less than imposing punk who he suspected could have burgled his mate Frank's house just recently?



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


You are a troll. I'm not going to play.

There are thousands of pages on ATS about this case. Do your own research!

When the story first broke I was on the hang Zimmerman bandwagon. I took the time to look at the case with an open mind and came up with my own conclusion.

In my humble opinion, Zimmerman was justified to use deadly force and Martin was a punk kid who tried to pick a fight with a man with a gun.

Back to the topic, the HOA probably could have won a civil case in court, it would have been very costly and bad press. Sometimes it is easier to just settle out of court, which is what happened here.




edit on 9-4-2013 by jrod because: typo



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I sort of feel disgusted. I understand " suing " I really do, but they went out of their way to profit off their son's death. How is suing the Home Owners association going to help bring justice? Honestly, you cannot convict Zimmerman without a shadow of a doubt. You just cannot do it, imo, at least from my current knowledge of the case.
-------

I am more weirded out by the parents desperate grab for money. The best way to get a corporation's attention is by suing the living day lights out of them, otherwise they would care less about your issue and wouldn't change a dang thing.

However, i cant fathom why this association would pay out to Martin's parents. It gets to the point where you lose sympathy, and you get sort of disgusted.

edit on 9-4-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by milkyway12
 


It's really not surprising at all that the parents resorted to suing. After all, they did put a trademark on his name (Trayvon)after his death. That right there should've raised some flags as to their character. That's also not mentioning that they had to be tracked down to be informed of their sons death.
I, for one, have a number to be contacted at in case something happens to my children so it wouldn't take days to find me. If one of my kids is missing for more than 12 hours i'm gonna be looking for them. But then again, I'm not Trayvons parents.
edit on 9-4-2013 by kimish because: add



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by kimish
reply to post by milkyway12
 


It's really not surprising at all that the parents resorted to suing. After all, they did put a trademark on his name after his death. That right there should've raised some flags as to their character.


The bitter irony is that their p!ss poor parenting brings them a hefty monetary bonus, through trademarking their deceased son's name and also the lawsuit. It almost sounds like pimping him out posthumously.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Very true! I edited that post to add to it. It's ironic what we both posted at the same time

People like that are opportunistic animals and they are found in all shapes and sizes and colors. I think it's people like that initiated the desire to practice Eugenics in the early 20th century.
I'd like to see some interviews with the parents, if anyone has the links to such things please post the link?
edit on 9-4-2013 by kimish because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by jrod
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


You are a troll. I'm not going to play. ]


Translation: "I know the more I type, the more ammo I'll give you for making me look completely silly, so I'll pass on any further correspondence, thanxbai"



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by kimish
 


Here's one.

www.youtube.com...

They come across as admirably controlled and dignified from where I'm sat. Certainly nothing like the "animals" deserving of eugenics you speak of.




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join