Trayvon Martin: Cellphone pics of guns and drugs

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by NavyDoc

ANd his injuries came from where? Were they a product of magic?

They came as a result of some kind of scuffle, but they certainly aren't indicative of a severe beating, which is what George claims he was getting. If Z's ground defence was really as crap as he is making out, Trayvon would have pummelled his face to a literal pulp, if he was capable of putting a 30lb heavier man on his ass with one punch, even when the 30lb heavier man could see it coming.

He had injuries on the back of his head that are consistent with the testimony of having his head hammered into the pavement in addition to the broken nose. Just as you say, the evidence is consistent with TM initiating the physical assault.

If George had merely claimed TM "tried" to slam his head against the sidewalk, they'd be marginally consistent, but he claims his head was actually SLAMMED, not pressed forcefully, against a concrete surface. Does George have a particularly bump-resistant head?

What do you mean? His scalp was split open on the back of the head that is completely consistent with his testimony.

Just saw this in another thread about police officers choking and slamming another young Florida teen into the ground for "looking at them wrong", they also said the young boy had "both fists clenched".

Reports are the young boy was holding a puppy and feeding it with a bottle.

I had JUST finished reading this thread when i clicked on that one and this video seemed so relevant.



If George Zimmermans past is of no concern to you or the fact that Treyvon was unarmed and GZ was than you probably won't get it.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Where is it reasonable or legal to physically assault someone for following you on a public street?

That's what the 'talking heads' on tv are continually bringing up.
Just Zimmerman being 'stupid' and following someone isn't illegal.
Even though his actions caused the situation, it isn't illegal.
The only thing illegal was the actual lethal event.
If Martin jumped Zimmerman, even though Zimmerman was following him, it would mean
Martin was the perp.

That's why I'm thinking that they'll go with a Manslaughter conviction.
(and I have no idea if it's the right thing or not).
Manslaughter .... like in car accidents when people die and it's not intended ....
Because Zimmermans following Martin set the events in motion that ended
with a death ... even if the death was Martins fault because he jumped Zimmerman.
(I'm not saying Martin did ... I'm saying 'IF' he did)

Or 2nd degree. One or the other.

Can I just make an observation .... there sure is a whole lot of testosterone being flung all over this thread. What would you do in a fight ... i've been in lots of fights ... act like a man ... etc etc etc ... I'm finding it kinda' amusing ... guys in a cigar smoke filled bar room kind of talk I suppose ...

That being said ... back to the topic ....

Originally posted by Allegorical
Just saw this in another thread about police officers choking and slamming another young Florida teen into the ground for "looking at them wrong", they also said the young boy had "both fists clenched".

Reports are the young boy was holding a puppy and feeding it with a bottle.

I had JUST finished reading this thread when i clicked on that one and this video seemed so relevant.

If George Zimmermans past is of no concern to you or the fact that Treyvon was unarmed and GZ was than you probably won't get it.

If GZ's past is relevant, then so is TM's past. Can't have it just one way.

Unarmed does not matter. If GZ was being assaulted as described, then he had legal and moral justification for a self defense shooting. Unless the boy with the puppy was pounding the police officer's head into the pavement at the time, the two incidents are not comparable.

Originally posted by Spider879


Hay army dude I am going by what your avatar looked like well so have I.. helping out a fellow human is a good thing but this GZ guy was not helping anyone and by the many previous complaints by residents he was a bullying jerk with delusions of grandeur .

edit on 31-5-2013 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)

Not Army.

Case by case. Doesn't matter if an anonymous source emailed someone thinking that he was aggressive. Case by case.

Originally posted by NavyDoc
If GZ's past is relevant, then so is TM's past. Can't have it just one way.

there ya go. exactly. Either it's all relevant .. or none of it is. From the info out there .. (if it's accurate .. and that's a big "IF' ) I'd say that both Martins team and Zimmerman want their histories kept quiet. Neither of them were exactly angels .. ya' know??

My old lady just made a good point. "When did neighborhood watch become neighborhood follow and forcible detain?" Thought their job was to observe and report?

I'm also thinking Z will be convicted of manslaughter, sent to a medium security facility, be held in protective custody, released after 1 year, and go into hiding and live in fear for the rest of his life.

Was it worth it? Probably not!!!


"Just can't fix stupid" R. White.

Originally posted by Tribunal
reply to post by macman

 

You misundertood the point of my post.

You are arguiing from the belief that M attacked Z, which is based on Z's own words, which are not confirmed by witnesses.

What I am saying is, that based on the things we do know, it seems more likely that Z confronted and maybe touched M, then the other way around.

If there was physical attributes before, then you have a right to self defense.
All laws are written as such that the person armed is justified in use of force, if they didn't escalate the initial situation. That means being confronted by someone for a fight, you say yeah lets go outside and then shot the person.
Personally, if I agree to a fight, it is a fight.
If not agreed upon, then all bets are off and out comes the 1911.

Originally posted by jheherrin

Originally posted by Tribunal
reply to post by jheherrin

 

LOL, and we can trust the CHIEF witness for the prosecuter, which is where you are getting your information?? The same chief witness who lied under oath and has a buttload of credibility issues?

What are you talking about?

What did I say that is not confirmed to be true?

What are YOU talking about? I quoted your message. Everything you stated there mainly came from the prosecuter's CHIEF WITNESS, who lied under oath. Do I need to give you google links as well?? You are the one parroting stuff you've read elsewhere. Not my problem if you can't be bothered to look into any further than some crappy article on CNN. Deny ignorance!

Still don't know what you are talking about.

I posted this,

-What if Zimmerman followed you and grabbed you?

This is a question.

-All we know for sure is that Zimmerman was agitated and focused on Martin. We know that he was chasing him.

This is based on the 911 call.

-Martin called his girlfriend saying he is scared because he is being followed.

Is this not true?

-The next thing we know is someone is caling for help and pleading for his life, and then a gunshot.

Based on 911 recording.

-Zimmerman can say that Martin attacked him but there are no witnesses to confirm this.

Are there?

-If a strange man followed me around at night and maybe tried to stop me, I would fight too. If during the fight I discovered a gun I would try to take it away.

Opinion.

-The point is you can't trust the shooters story and everything points to him being the aggressor.

Fact.

So what are you talking about? What non credible witness did I get what info from?

Originally posted by NavyDoc

What do you mean? His scalp was split open on the back of the head that is completely consistent with his testimony.

It wasn't "split open" at all. It had minor scratches on it, with no noticeable swelling whatsoever. The kind of injury you'd get when your head slightly brushed against a tiny stone on the ground, rather than what would occur if it had been slammed against concrete 2 or more times.

Fight or flight If some creepy dude is following you those are your options,I for one would have at-least said.. dude!! wtf who are you?? and why are you tailing me..from there things can go south real fast.

The thing that irks me is that no one knows how zimmerman approached Treyvon. If zimmerman approached Treyvon flashing his gun and talking reckless or actually tried to grab and hold Treyvon until the Police arrived then i would say Treyvon had every right to bash zimmermans head into the ground. Some people feel as tho Treyvon had no right to stand HIS ground againts an unknown gun weilding aggressor. Why would Treyvon go to the store for snacks during half time of a basketball game and then just RANDOMLY decide to attack george zimmerman?

zimmerman was following Treyvon and that is a fact. It is also a fact that zimmerman was armed and Treyvon was not. It is also a fact that 911 dispatch told zimmerman to stand down. It is also a fact the police were on the way. It is also a fact that Treyvon was NOT trespassing OR committing a crime when zimmerman first observed him. It is also a fact that zimmerman did not want Treyvon to "get away" (zimmermans OWN words). It is also a fact that zimmerman has a past arrest history that is 100% violent and Treyvon has NONE.

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by Tribunal
reply to post by macman

 

You misundertood the point of my post.

You are arguiing from the belief that M attacked Z, which is based on Z's own words, which are not confirmed by witnesses.

What I am saying is, that based on the things we do know, it seems more likely that Z confronted and maybe touched M, then the other way around.

If there was physical attributes before, then you have a right to self defense.
All laws are written as such that the person armed is justified in use of force, if they didn't escalate the initial situation. That means being confronted by someone for a fight, you say yeah lets go outside and then shot the person.
Personally, if I agree to a fight, it is a fight.
If not agreed upon, then all bets are off and out comes the 1911.

edit on 31-5-2013 by macman because: (no reason given)

Wow, what does that have to do with what I said.

What I said is that there is no proof that M attacked Z, yet all the evidence points towards Z being the aggressor. The fact that he got hurt in the processs doesn't make him innocent or the victim.

The whole situation was very unfortunate. Zimmerman made a snap judgment out of fear.. Something every single one of us have done to some degree. Martin reacted to Zimmeman's fear with his own fear. I feel for both sides. A boy lost his life and a man lost his freedom. I think the witch hunt is ridiculous. There was prob. no right or wrong. Zimmerman didn't leave his home that night with intentions of killing a teenager. Martin didn't walk through the neighborhood looking for a life threatening fight. It just happened that way. Fear does terrible things to judgement.. It's very sad.

reply to post by Tribunal


My statement stems from that.
If Z put his hands on TM first, then TM has a right to fight back. If not, then no right.

reply to post by Allegorical


I don't understand Zimmerman's logic:

You are being followed and called your girlfriend,

You lose sight of the armed guard (yay!!)

You decide to risk your life by attacking him as he's ALREADY walking to the car.

Is this story really that believable?

reply to post by peashooter


If you believe young black males are violent uneducated animals it does.

Originally posted by Spider879
Fight or flight If some creepy dude is following you those are your options,I for one would have at-least said.. dude!! wtf who are you?? and why are you tailing me..from there things can go south real fast.

edit on 31-5-2013 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)

So I thought about this a little. If Trayvon was fleeing from Zimmerman repeatedly and trying to get away...Confirmed by both Zimmerman and the cell call with Trayvon and GF etc....why stop and confront Zimmeran?

One of two scenarios are likely....Zimmerman confronted Trayvon not vice-versa....or

Trayvon got closer to home and was scared to let the wacko chasing him know where he lived/follow him home. So he worked up the courage to ask ZImmerman what was up?

From there...we will never know for sure what happened. But A 17 year old boy doesn't run for his life one minute and then the next attack. Seems just very unlikely.

Zimmerman admitted that to cops that he didn't say anything to Trayvon when confronted...about being "Neighborhood watch" or "there have been recent break-ins and I am just checking things out"...zip.

Is it possible he got all macho? Told Trayvon to get in the car? Or took him by the arm?

And Trayvon panicked and threw down...whilst yelling for help?