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.

 

The Zimmerman Trial

page: 115
25
<< 112  113  114    116  117  118 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 

The Prosecution brought in a hired gun ME. The ME that handled the body hasn't been on.
(unless I missed it??)

The hired gun was neutralized by the defense. She tried to make statements about Zimmermans
wounds based on pictures. And then she herself said that she can't do it based on pictures and
that it's unprofessional. And then the defense got her to admit that she couldn't say exactly
how many times Zimmerman was hit or that his head was slammed into the concrete.

I don't know what the ME who handled his body is going to say.
That he was shot in the chest and died almost instantly .....
We know that.

There are only something like 2 prosecution witness' left ....




posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:13 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

We'll have to go back over the transcript. I heard slightly different.

Court comes back at 1:45 .... I have to go walk the dog .... by-bye for now.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by riffraff

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie

Originally posted by riffraff
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


You keep typing GM. I wouldn't call you out on it, but this is the 2nd or 3rd time you've typed GM. Do you mean TM or GZ?


i have a dyslexia, sometimes when i rush when i type i do that. if you notice sometimes i leave letters off words to.
and sometimes my mind gets ahead of my fingers.


Lol. You still didn't answer my question; I really am a bit confused. I think you mean GZ but I am not sure


you are correct, and i'll start trying to watch more closely now, and use my spell checker. of course spell checker won't help all the time.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by WonderBoi

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by WonderBoi
 

It's painfully obvious that you aren't watching the trial.

Dude .. seriously ...
Dude seriously to you. HE KILLED SOMEONE and you people are justifying it! I don't give a crap about his color, his background, his upbringing. Zimmerman shot and KILLED Martin. #End of friggin' story!


Ill take it one step further. He killed somebody and the law justifies it. That is, unless this case takes a John Grisham/ M. Night Shamalamahamalaham twist. That would be exciting.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Just stop talking to the people who are obviously not watching the trial or whose purpose is to derail or argue crap.
Just some unsolicited advice. That's my policy.
Disregard if desired.


It's clear some of us are watching the trial and highly involved in the FACTS of the case. You, me, FF, ugie1028, IvanAstikov and possibly a couple others come to mind.
The rest are just flies in the ointment.


Back after Lunch.

edit on 7/3/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by UnBreakable
 


Erm... because he'd been putting as much dedication into his combat classes as he'd put into his law studies, perhaps?



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by riffraff

Originally posted by WonderBoi

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by WonderBoi
 

It's painfully obvious that you aren't watching the trial.

Dude .. seriously ...
Dude seriously to you. HE KILLED SOMEONE and you people are justifying it! I don't give a crap about his color, his background, his upbringing. Zimmerman shot and KILLED Martin. #End of friggin' story!


Ill take it one step further. He killed somebody and the law justifies it. That is, unless this case takes a John Grisham/ M. Night Shamalamahamalaham twist. That would be exciting.
I don't live in this man's "laws". That's the difference between you and me. And, i certainly wouldn't need a firearm, to beat a so called "thug", like Martin. Only punks and cowards need a weapon to "defend" themselves. You wanna kill someone, join the police force or military, and do so: "lawfully"; as you say!



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by MrWendal
 

The Prosecution brought in a hired gun ME. The ME that handled the body hasn't been on.
(unless I missed it??)

The hired gun was neutralized by the defense. She tried to make statements about Zimmermans
wounds based on pictures. And then she herself said that she can't do it based on pictures and
that it's unprofessional. And then the defense got her to admit that she couldn't say exactly
how many times Zimmerman was hit or that his head was slammed into the concrete.

I don't know what the ME who handled his body is going to say.
That he was shot in the chest and died almost instantly .....
We know that.

There are only something like 2 prosecution witness' left ....


I saw the "hired gun" ME. Although you and I disagree about that witnessed being "neutralized".

I was talking about the ME who handled the body and did the autopsy. As far as what that person could say? Well that testimony will tell us if the gun was pressed into the body and fired or if the gun was just touching the clothing (as in clothing hanging down touching the gun as it was fired), but not actually pressed into the body.

The point of such questioning would be to either confirm on deny another one of Zimmerman's claims. As you may remember, Zimmerman claims he did not know if the bullet actually hit Trayvon or not. He thought he may have missed and shot wide after Trayvon had sat up and said, "You got me". Which is when Zimmerman got on his back and held him down. Zimmerman has been very clear in saying he was not sure if Trayvon was hit by the bullet or not.

Now if the gun was pressed into his chest at the time it was fired, that not only debunks the claim but proves intent. Forget about your position and what you think... just think about what I said objectively for a moment. Proving intent to kill would be huge for the Prosecution.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Zimmerman also said a couple times he thought he shot wide... If the gun was touching the shirt, chalk up another lie.

I see you already said that. Never mind.

edit on 7/3/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by WonderBoi

Originally posted by riffraff

Originally posted by WonderBoi

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by WonderBoi
 

It's painfully obvious that you aren't watching the trial.

Dude .. seriously ...
Dude seriously to you. HE KILLED SOMEONE and you people are justifying it! I don't give a crap about his color, his background, his upbringing. Zimmerman shot and KILLED Martin. #End of friggin' story!


Ill take it one step further. He killed somebody and the law justifies it. That is, unless this case takes a John Grisham/ M. Night Shamalamahamalaham twist. That would be exciting.
I don't live in this man's "laws". That's the difference between you and me. And, i certainly wouldn't need a firearm, to beat a so called "thug", like Martin. Only punks and cowards need a weapon to "defend" themselves. You wanna kill someone, join the police force or military, and do so: "lawfully"; as you say!


well if someone brakes into my house in the middle of the night and trys to hurt me or my wife, ill shoot em. guess im a coward. Sorry im not a F'in ninja like you.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Her testimony sounds far better if you wilfully ignore her overall assessment that however many blows George received, he only ended up with insignificant injuries, and at that rate of damage causing, Trayvon could have been flailing away until the cops arrived and George would still only have had minor to moderate injuries.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by UnBreakable
 


Erm... because he'd been putting as much dedication into his combat classes as he'd put into his law studies, perhaps?


Which is even more of a reason to pull the trigger at say............. 10 feet away.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by MrWendal
 


Just stop talking to the people who are obviously not watching the trial or whose purpose is to derail or argue crap.
Just some unsolicited advice. That's my policy.
Disregard if desired.


It's clear some of us are watching the trial and highly involved in the FACTS of the case. You, me, FF, ugie1028, IvanAstikov and possibly a couple others come to mind.
The rest are just flies in the ointment.


Back after Lunch.

edit on 7/3/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)
I got all the facts i needed, with Zimmerman's re-enactment of the event. All this other crap, is smoke and mirrors, designed to form opinions as to what occurred, to determine if he was justified. What 'facts' do you people insist there are??? The only fact i know is that someone was killed by a real PUNK! A punk that needed help in a fist fight....or ALLEGED "attack".



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 




well if someone brakes into my house in the middle of the night and trys to hurt me or my wife, ill shoot em. guess im a coward. Sorry im not a F'in ninja like you.
That's what REAL self defense means. It doesn't mean all this other crap, you people are passing off as "self defense"; as i have said before.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by MrWendal
 

The Prosecution brought in a hired gun ME. The ME that handled the body hasn't been on.
(unless I missed it??)

The hired gun was neutralized by the defense. She tried to make statements about Zimmermans
wounds based on pictures. And then she herself said that she can't do it based on pictures and
that it's unprofessional. And then the defense got her to admit that she couldn't say exactly
how many times Zimmerman was hit or that his head was slammed into the concrete.

I don't know what the ME who handled his body is going to say.
That he was shot in the chest and died almost instantly .....
We know that.

There are only something like 2 prosecution witness' left ....


I saw the "hired gun" ME. Although you and I disagree about that witnessed being "neutralized".

I was talking about the ME who handled the body and did the autopsy. As far as what that person could say? Well that testimony will tell us if the gun was pressed into the body and fired or if the gun was just touching the clothing (as in clothing hanging down touching the gun as it was fired), but not actually pressed into the body.

The point of such questioning would be to either confirm on deny another one of Zimmerman's claims. As you may remember, Zimmerman claims he did not know if the bullet actually hit Trayvon or not. He thought he may have missed and shot wide after Trayvon had sat up and said, "You got me". Which is when Zimmerman got on his back and held him down. Zimmerman has been very clear in saying he was not sure if Trayvon was hit by the bullet or not.

Now if the gun was pressed into his chest at the time it was fired, that not only debunks the claim but proves intent. Forget about your position and what you think... just think about what I said objectively for a moment. Proving intent to kill would be huge for the Prosecution.


or it just proves intent on the stopping of getting your face pounded in in self defence



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by UnBreakable
 


Are you serious? Are you really suggesting that someone who has been trained in unarmed combat should immediately resort to his firearm at the sight of an unarmed opponent? I'm pretty sure that's illegal unless you are a cop, isn't it?



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss

or it just proves intent on the stopping of getting your face pounded in in self defence


Assuming facts not in evidence. His face might have been hit once or more, but it wasn't pounded by any normal definition of the word.



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by WonderBoi
reply to post by camaro68ss
 




well if someone brakes into my house in the middle of the night and trys to hurt me or my wife, ill shoot em. guess im a coward. Sorry im not a F'in ninja like you.
That's what REAL self defense means. It doesn't mean all this other crap, you people are passing off as "self defense"; as i have said before.


guess the men that stormed the beaches of normandy should take some pointers from you, maybe we would not have lost so many men if they had your ninja skills.

so refresh my memory, how am I going to implement my ninja skills when the bad guy is pointing a gun at me from 15 ft away?

Time for you to go play outside little boy, get some fresh air.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 112  113  114    116  117  118 >>

log in

join