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: 51
25
<< 48  49  50    52  53  54 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 

If Trayvon had ran down to Brandy Green's, then decided to go back and sort Cracker George out, don't you think a real thug would have popped inside for a more suitable weapon than a canned drink, before heading back up there? You have to really stretch the bounds of imagination to believe he ran all the way home away from the creepy-ass guy, then totally changed his mindset and went back to where he'd lost him to be confrontational.




posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by PLASIFISK
 


I am not saying he didn't follow him. I am saying he WASN'T following him when Martin attacked Zimmerman. Zimmerman was heading back to his truck, Martin was lying in wait. That is reality, that is fact, that is Zimmerman's story and the key witness of prosecutions story.

You also conveniently ignored all of my message, focused on one word and tried to make an argument out of it. You need to get with reality, as I said before.

I am right, I will be proven right.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The witness was called this morning. Good. He described seeing Martin on top of Zimmerman and that Martin was pounding on him. That's in sworn testimony. And according to law, if Zimmerman thought his life was in danger he had the right to use lethal force. He didn't have to wait until his life was ebbing away. He just had to believe his life was in danger. And as I said .. if it were me in that situation .. I would have though my life was in danger and I would have shot the gun.


If you are a female, with no mma training whatsoever, I understand that completely. If you are disabled, infirm or elderly, I'd understand it then, too. But, if you're a healthy adult male who is capable of enduring 9 hours of high level mma training per week, you don't get that same luxury. You are supposed to defend yourself proportionately to the threat level, not escalate it right up to a guaranteed to be lethal level.
]


Ivan,
You are not the luxury police. I am a healthy able body male who works out daily. I bench 360lbs. I squat 550. I run a mile in under five1/2 min. like most big strong guys i am super chill. Not an aggressive bone in my body. And I carry EVERY day. If someone attacks me I will go straight to lethal force, because like I said before I am the most mello guy you will ever meet.i will walk away from anything I can physically walk away from. If you attack me it is because you are criminally insane or you want to rape my wife. I will not let that happen. I would have shot as soon as I got sucker punched. Don't like it? It's not a luxury, it's a RIGHT
edit on 28-6-2013 by riffraff because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


No you don't because TRAYVON SAID HE WAS HOME.

It's not a stretch of imagination. It is an indisputable fact. He told the girl on the phone he was by his house and then talked with her for several minutes before Zimmerman came back through. That means he had plenty of time to pop in and grab a more suitable weapon. He liked to fight as many have said, he intended to fight. You are operating a lie under the assumption he might have a weapon in his house he would grab, or think to grab? That's ignorant.

He died by his house, the house he said he was beside several minutes before he confronted Zimmerman. He chose not to go in. He was there. If you say he wasn't you are a liar or willingly ignorant because the information is there in front of you. No one in this case is disputing that Martin made it home.
edit on 28-6-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   
For Mansloughter


Defenses to Manslaughter

In addition to the pretrial defenses and trial defenses that can be raised in any criminal case, specific defenses to the crime of Manslaughter are:

Excusable Homicide

The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:

When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or
When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.
Justifiable Homicide

The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if done while resisting an attempt by someone to kill you or to commit a felony against you.

Self Defense

Also known as the justified use of deadly force, self defense is a defense to the crime of Second Degree Murder. Please view the Florida Self Defense section for more information.
Affirmative Defenses

Under certain circumstances, Florida law allows a person to raise an Affirmative Defense, which does not deny that an offense occurred, but that the conduct was legally justified.

The most common Affirmative Defenses are:

Advice of Counsel
Alibi
Duress
Entrapment
Insanity
Necessity
Self Defense
Importantly, when an Affirmative Defense is raised, the defendant must present some evidence to support the defense. If such evidence is presented, the burden shift back to the State to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense is not applicable.
t



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by PLASIFISK
 


Don't respond unless you are responding to wait I said. Don't tell me what you believe I said at some point. You are deflecting.

The fact is you don't want to reply to what I am saying because you know you are wrong. Zimmerman was not following Martin when Martin confronted him. That's the fact. Zimmerman was on his way back to the truck.

No need to comment on anything but what I am saying. That's what is funny about you guys whenever you are shown to be wrong you forget how conversation works.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


She was the reason. She was the first person and only person that gave an alternative account to Zimmerman's. She was the reason it went to court.

She is a proven liar on multiple accounts and admitted that she was lying or "rushin'" through the interviews that were the basis for the case. The prosecutions statement was that Zimmerman hunted Martin down and killed him in cold blood. Their key witness (when finally telling the truth in court) showed that Martin wasn't really afraid, waited on Zimmerman, and made contact first. All of her stuff about him not fighting is dubious at best considering by her own account the phone was disconnected before she heard any of the things she claimed that supported Trayvon. She also did say she assumed Trayvon got into a fight and that's why he didn't call back.
So most likely she was aware that he was waiting to confront and fight the person after him, and that's what he did and it got him killed.
edit on 28-6-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)


In all her testimony, did she sound like the type of person who could easily con someone into believing something was true? If her conversation with Trayvon Martin had involved him mentioning that he was going to beat up the creepy-ass guy, how hard do you think it would be for O Mara to make her slip up? If you are suggesting she conned her way through the defence's interrogation, it doesn't speak very highly of George's defence team.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


You both get down the same way.


By that I assume you mean "you both" use common sense argument in line with the evidence, testimony, common sense, and reality? Rather than you guys who argue based on bias against gun owners/users, racial lines, and emotion.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


No you don't because TRAYVON SAID HE WAS HOME.

It's not a stretch of imagination. It is an indisputable fact. He told the girl on the phone he was by his house and then talked with her for several minutes before Zimmerman came back through. That means he had plenty of time to pop in and grab a more suitable weapon. He liked to fight as many have said, he intended to fight. You are operating a lie under the assumption he might have a weapon in his house he would grab, or think to grab? That's ignorant.

He died by his house, the house he said he was beside several minutes before he confronted Zimmerman. He chose not to go in. He was there. If you say he wasn't you are a liar or willingly ignorant because the information is there in front of you. No one in this case is disputing that Martin made it home.
edit on 28-6-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)


He did NOT die by his house. If you can't even get basic things like this right, why should anyone take a word you type seriously? Unless by "by his house" you mean 2 blocks away?
edit on 28-6-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


That's where the defense was weak. He took it WAY easy on her and they had to be super descriptive with the questions because she was unable to follow the narrative.

The defense didn't ask her straight forward questions for several reasons first when you ask her a straightforward question she knows when to lie, and second they were using kid gloves and didn't want to appear rough on her. She did slip up multiple times and that's what destroyed the prosecutions case. I am not certain but I was under the impression that she could be called back in.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


That's where the defense was weak. He took it WAY easy on her and they had to be super descriptive with the questions because she was unable to follow the narrative.


Exploiting the uneducated, or those with learning disabilities, is never a good look, even for an attorney.
edit on 28-6-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


He absolutely did. You need to look at a map. He was within around 100 yards of his house. Most people without an agenda would consider that dying by your house.

Especially when you consider that he said he was by his house several minutes before the fight broke out. If he died that close, and was that same distance (that is assuming he didn't move further from the house when he confronted Zimmerman, which he likely did) for the minutes before the fight then he could have easily run or walked home. In reality he made it closer (than he died) to his home and hung around then moved further away to approach zimmerman.

If you can understand that you will know it's true. That is reality. That is based on the story presented in court by both sides.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


That's where the defense was weak. He took it WAY easy on her and they had to be super descriptive with the questions because she was unable to follow the narrative.


Exploiting the uneducated, or those with learning disabilities is never a good look, even for an attorney.


Another deflection from you to avoid answering to the facts. You know she was prepped by the prosecution to know when to lie and what not to say. That is why she wouldn't say anything she was aware directly incriminated Martin, but she slipped up and did just that in multiple instances where she wasn't aware the truth she was telling did hurt the prosecutions case.


edit on 28-6-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


I take absolutely no issue with gun owners. Which body cavity you retrieved that from; I have no idea.

I am all about the second amendment even though my leanings are left of left of far left. I do not place myself in some box.

However, I take issue with a punk using a firearm on a kid because, after initiating a confrontation, he ends up getting punked. That is a big deal to me. It certainly is at least manslaughter, if not second degree murder. It is dependent upon his intentions of carrying the firearm in the first place. I don't think it was for out of control canines.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:14 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


He absolutely did. You need to look at a map. He was within around 100 yards of his house. Most people without an agenda would consider that dying by your house.

Especially when you consider that he said he was by his house several minutes before the fight broke out. If he died that close, and was that same distance (that is assuming he didn't move further from the house when he confronted Zimmerman, which he likely did) for the minutes before the fight then he could have easily run or walked home. In reality he made it closer (than he died) to his home and hung around then moved further away to approach zimmerman.

If you can understand that you will know it's true. That is reality. That is based on the story presented in court by both sides.


What are you waffling about? First off you agree that "by his house" means 100 yds away, then you are insisting he went all the way to his home, based on what, exactly?



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by GrantedBail
 


Well then you have no issue with Zimmerman because it was actually a punk kid that confronted him as admitted by the lead witness for the prosecution.


I find it mind blowing that you allow yourself to by the lies sold to you by the state to put away a guy who was defending his life. You really are missing what's going on. You are just buying the medias version. The media shares your exact stance denying all logic. That is why there will be another upset like with the Casey Anthony case.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 48  49  50    52  53  54 >>

log in

join