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.

 

Breaking News! George Zimmerman found not guilty.

page: 92
157
<< 89  90  91    93  94 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 




You are doing all your thinking based on the premise that Zimmerman is a trustworthy person, and I'm not.


It was the the task of the prosecution to prove that Zimmerman was not trustworthy, in relation to his story that he gave to the police.
They failed to do that. They had no evidence to prove that he was lying.

If you are starting on the premise that he was lying, you would make a good investigator, but a poor juror.

Maybe you should look inside yourself and find the reason why you suspect that he lied, when there is no evidence to indicate that he did.




posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 





They had no evidence to prove that he was lying.


Well, it's hardly surprising, as they didn't even question Zimmerman's wife to confirm that he really did leave the house when he said he did, or whether he'd been out on patrol for a while before spotting Trayvon sheltering under the mailboxes, as opposed to his also unchecked claim that he first spotted Trayvon lurking by his best mate's house, something they could have verified by speaking to the house owner where the car that caused him to slow down reversed from.

The police also didn't seem to make any attempt to match up his claim that he began speaking to the nen operator while parked at the clubhouse, which could have been easily verified by just going to the point on the clubhouse cctv footage where Zimmerman claims it happened.

When you add in that they didn't check Officer Smith's in car camera to confirm where Zimmerman parked his vehicle to get out and follow Trayvon, it's hard not to wonder whether they were ever really interested in finding out the real reason a teenager had been shot dead, by a guy who should have been showing far more caution considering the potential danger he was placing himself in.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


Lack of investigation does not prove guilt.
It just shows that the police department performing the investigation needs to be improved through training.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


It really has nothing to do with Zimmerman's trustworthiness.

You are trying to establish character credibility based on incidents that have no bearing on the verdict.

Let me ask this. .. .

Let’s say that he parked in a different spot than he said he did, how does using that to prove that he was lying about where he parked have any bearing on the evidence that the jury used to acquit him?

Here is a Real example of a lie that Zimmerman perpetrated . .. .

When asked if he knew about the Stand Your Ground law he said that he had never heard of such a thing.

Yet, it was discovered that he in fact did know about the law and did special studies on it while he was in law school.

In my book that Does make him a liar by definition. However, even though he did lie about that it had no bearing on the information that used to acquit him.

My point is that someone may be a liar but, if there is evidence that proves he did not commit a crime then establishing that he is a liar is Not going to have any bearing.

Keep in mind that the average male lies 5-10 times a day.

How about IF he said that he changed his underwear on a daily basis but actually only changed it every other day? That would make him a liar, but then, that has absolutely no bearing on the evidence that was used to acquit him.


edit on 28-7-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum
 





Let’s say that he parked in a different spot than he said he did, how does using that to prove that he was lying about where he parked have any bearing on the evidence that the jury used to acquit him?


The exact location where he parked his vehicle is very relevant to what his intentions were when he left it. If, for example, it had instead been parked further towards the back exit to The Retreat before either his wife or his friend Osterman removed it, would that not lead you to suspect he had tried to cut off Trayvon's path to the south entrance?
edit on 29-7-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum

I Said . ..


I’ll tell you what. Go out and try to prove your theory. Go get into an argument with someone and kill them and then tell me that they let you off for self-defense. After all if it is as easy as you say it is then there shouldn’t be a problem.

Those quotes came from page 84 and 85. Read it a couple of times to be sure that it sinks in.

There is absolutely No Question what you said. There is absolutely No Question what I said.


Agreed, there's none at all. You told me to go out and kill somebody. This is stupid because:

- one can obviously prove things through argument rather than action. This especially, and it's notable that you are unable to refute my claims other than by asking me to replicate the activity. Perhaps you could try to do so in a manner not normally associated with 12 yer olds?

- if you happened to be in a position like Martin you would be smeared as a violent person inciting murder. Ironically.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Z's INNOCENT get over it.

Jury system worked



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


Well, since he was a night watchman patrolling for the likes of burglars it would only make sense that he would try to cut off the path of said suspects.

But then again, it appears that you must have not read my recent posts explaining the Lack of his intent in the 4 points of 5 principles.

Either that or you have a hard time understanding it.

You keep stabbing at the idea that Zimmerman had malicious intent. That is just Not the case.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum
 


If his intent was to delay or detain a person via directing the police to them, without having actually seen them doing anything more suspicious than standing beneath a shelter while it was raining, I wouldn't exactly call that benevolent behaviour. That you prefer to believe Zimmerman saw Trayvon elsewhere and acting in a truly suspicious manner, says more about your mindset than it does about Zimmerman's credibility.

As much as you'd seem to like to lump me in with the Al Sharpton's of this world, I've never believed Zimmerman set out that night to kill himself a black person. I do believe he decided immediately upon seeing Trayvon that he was up to no good and was not going to get away this time, tho'. And, if that meant holding on to him until a cop turned up, I also believe he felt he was capable of doing that and denying any accusations Trayvon would have made about his actions.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


Exactly. Should Zimmerman have gone free? Probably, just about, yes. Should the US be trying to make this kind of tragedy less likely in the future? Absolutely yes.

And the way to do that is not to crow about it and get all excited about the verdict. It's a dead kid whichever way you slice it.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


I guess you have failed to consider that it was Night time and that there had been several burglaries in the recent past. Someone just hanging out in the rain next to a building could easily be construed as suspicious as hell. Especially to a watchman who had been directed to keep an eye out for suspicious activity.

That you keep asserting Non-Events to support your argument says allot about Your mindset.


As much as you'd seem to like to lump me in with the Al Sharpton's of this world

I have done no such thing. I haven't even made any indication of such a thing. So where the hell did that come from?

My problem is that you continue to argue that Zimmerman is a Damn Liar and that he More Than Likely murdered Trayvon because he is lying.

As I have mentioned several times now. .. He may very well be a liar but, that has absolutely no bearing what so ever on the facts that were used to acquit him.

I also wanted to point out, just in case you don't understand, that Zimmerman was following Trayvon so that he could tell the police where he was.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 12:14 PM
link   
This thread is still going?

All I can say is bah bah bah go the sheeple while this trial is happening.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum
 


It was 7 o clock in the evening on a Sunday. Hardly primo burgling hours, and no self-respecting burglar would go out wearing light-coloured trousers for such an activity.

If someone attracts your attention, you should watch them to establish that they are indeed acting suspiciously, not immediately phone the nen guy - who you have no intention of listening to anyway, as he has no authority over you - and then start making crap up to justify calling.

When a person is explaining away a dead body they have just admitted putting a bullet in the heart of(not that he could have ran away, after having already phoned the nen), every little lie they tell has importance, as a general indicator of their credibility regarding the subject at hand.

Is it your suggestion that Zimmerman absolutely had to identify where Trayvon was and the only way he could do that was to leave his vehicle? If Trayvon had gone into one of the homes before Zimmerman had reached the T, was he going to suggest to the cops they should search every house to see which one he'd gone in?

To buy your line of thinking it is imperative that you treat the claims of George Zimmerman as being absolute gospel to the best of his conveniently forgetful memory.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


You have just exhibited my point that you really Do Not get it at all.

I was thinking there was a learning curve issue, but, it goes much deeper than that.

Answer these questions .. ..

How does Zimmerman lying have any bearing that he was screaming and yelling for help in the 911 call?
How does Zimmerman lying have any thing to do with a witness placing Martin on top of him administering a beating?
How does Zimmerman lying have anything to do with Trayvon's girlfriend testifying that Trayvon was the aggressor?
How does Zimmerman lying have anything to do with Zimmerman calling the police dispatch to report a suspicious character?

As I have mentioned before Zimmerman did lie. However, the lies that were perpetrated had Absolutely Nothing to do with the evidence that was used to acquit him.

I suggest that since you are not even getting it at all that you leave well enough alone.

You continue to suggest that by proving Zimmerman a liar, that the outcome of the verdict would have been different. That is just NOT THE CASE.

By the way .. . Criminals commit burglaries during daylight hours as well as night time hours on a daily basis. So, there is really no "Primo" time to commit a burglary.
edit on 29-7-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum
 


How many lies does a person faced with a possible murder charge have to tell before their story should be viewed with suspicion and investigated as thoroughly as possible? And, before you respond "There was a thorough investigation!", you need to check how many people were interviewed on the night of the shooting, and how little time cops actually spent questioning them.




By the way .. . Criminals commit burglaries during daylight hours as well as night time hours on a daily basis. So, there is really no "Primo" time to commit a burglary.


Yes, there is. When the person is not at home is usually ideal, as long as their home security is as poor as the average person's. There's also times which are the least suitable, such as, the day before everyone goes back to work and most people are chillaxing in front of their tv's, as evidenced by nearly every witness off The Retreat called forth to testify.


edit on 29-7-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-7-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-7-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 



How many lies does a person faced with a possible murder charge have to tell before their story should be viewed with suspicion and investigated as thoroughly as possible?

Why did you not bother to answer those 4 questions?

Do you have any idea what a Pathological Liar is?

George Zimmerman could be a Pathological Liar and it would Not make one difference.

Why? . .. because regardless of what he could have lied about has No Bearing What So Ever on the evidence that was used to acquit him.

The evidence comes from everyone else. NOT HIM. How do you Not get that?

He did Not say ANYTHING in his defense. He did Not testify. Do you know what that means?

It means that he may be a Damn Liar but it doesn’t' make any difference. NONE AT ALL. That is a FACT. Learn to Live With It.

Also, there are No Primo hours for someone to commit burglary. You apparently must live in a shelter. Because just as many happen during the day when people are at home as when they are in bed at night. You really are clueless.

Because I will consider any further responses from you as an act of Retardation, I am not going to entertain any other responses. It is Very Clear that you do not have Any understanding of the Criminal Justice System here in the U.S..



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum


George Zimmerman could be a Pathological Liar and it would Not make one difference.

It means that he may be a Damn Liar but it doesn’t' make any difference. NONE AT ALL.


That's not true. If, for example, it had been proved that Zimmerman hit Martin first, or roughed him up in some way, then the outcome of the trial might well have been different. As such his acquittal rested at least partly on the jury believing the crux of his story. They might have been less willing to do this had his alterations to the narrative been more fully explored.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 05:29 AM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


When the crux of the story is supported by the crux of the evidence...... No cuts or bruises on the autopsy, no stretched or ripped clothes to suggest a fight.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 05:34 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Which only makes me wonder, what exactly was Zimmerman doing with his hands for at least 30 seconds? Methinks Mr Grabby had one grabby hand on the front of Trayvon's hoody and the other on his gun long before he actually shot Trayvon. Or, you could just believe his claim that he totally forgot he was carrying a weapon until Trayvon helpfully reminded him of its presence, and despite his head having been bashed into near unconsciousness, Heroic George finally managed to get his act together and peform like his cop buddy Osterman had taught him. Well, apart from the bit where he's supposed to shoot a vicious attacker until he's sure they are no longer a threat.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


I'm taking issue with the notion that it doesn't matter if Zimmerman lied about the event. I think it does, both in the narrow terms of the case and in the wider sense of whether he is culpable.

I don't think struggles of the kind that might have made Martin fear for his life necessarily require the evidence you describe anyway. Martin managed to - apparently - beat up Zimmerman and grab his gun without leaving any DNA on himself or the gun at all. So I'd be surprised if a restraint or a scuffle would definitely leave any physical signs.
edit on 30-7-2013 by JuniorDisco because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
157
<< 89  90  91    93  94 >>

log in

join