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.
Originally posted by oasisjack
I knew in my gut when the story first broke. Looking at Zimmerman I saw a sad scared man trying to cope with the fact he shot some one. But when the media portrayed him as a white/hispanic power racist with an AK mowing down newborn black babies in the sanford neonatal intinsive care unit (think scar face only fat and slightly less racist). It was clear he was innocent plus if nancy grace makes a special about you being guilty its a safe bet you are not.
Seriously though the whole primise of his guilt is him being told to stand down (not true btw... just told they didnt need him to follow martin) and that 17 year olds cannot be criminals or dangerous (also not true according to colombine, most of detroit, my highschool growing up). Once those failed it was because he was black. Zimmerman was consistant those wishing him convicted were not tnat was a sure sign of innocence.
Once those failed it was because he was black. Zimmerman was consistant those wishing him convicted were not tnat was a sure sign of innocence.
Originally posted by playernumber13
reply to post by jude11
Fact - There was a fight.
Fact - The guy with the gun won.
I don't know what my point is but I just wanted to share what we know.
But the real issue I have is with those who "Absolutely know" justice has either been served or denied.
Originally posted by boncho
I know that neighbourhood suffered a rash of break-ins, thefts, home evasions leading up to the incident. I know that at least one of those, it was a neighbourhood kid responsible for it.
I know the lady who hid in her house while it was being burglarized, that she was scared ****less until the police arrived and the suspects fled.
I know that even though Zimmerman comes off as a tool, a Paul Blart mall cop wannabe, he was doing it for the lady above. So no matter how much of a loser you might think he is, the people harassing and terrorizing family people in that neighbourhood are much worse.
I know that Zimmerman called police, was told to stop following someone who he thought was suspicious given the history of breakins in the neighbourhood, he did stop. And he was arranging to meet the police to give a statement.
I know that while he was waiting to meet up with police to give his statement, Martin who had already reached his destination double-backed to confront Zimmerman after calling him a "creepy ass cracker".
I also know that before this happened, Martin called himself a gangsta, got into fights with people and bragged to his friends while lying to parents or authority, I know he was involved in illegal gun sales, in drug sales, portrayed himself as a thug and acted like one too.
I know that when Zimmerman thought he was "suspicious" it might have been because Martin acted like a suspicious dude, given all his history.
So was justice served?
The people who failed Martin were his parents.edit on 14-7-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by jude11
But the real issue I have is with those who "Absolutely know" justice has either been served or denied.
Reasonable doubt is what it takes to find the man innocent. So if you're arguing we all have reasonable doubt that puts you squarely in the innocent camp.
From a morality standpoint, I get what you're saying, from a legal standpoint you agree with the verdict.
Trayvon Martin
Claim: Photographs document 17-year-old shooting victim Trayvon Martin was a muscular, 6'2" man.
www.snopes.com...
FALSE
Origins: In March 2012 the web site Twitchy.com attempted to counter what they claimed was evidence of bias by the mainstream media in their reporting of the shooting incident involving Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, claiming that news stories typically used a photograph of a glowering George Zimmerman which looked like a mug shot while consistently running a 5-year-old image of Trayvon Martin that pictured him as an innocent-looking 12-year-old child rather than the 17-year-old near adult he was at the time of the shooting. In response, Twitchy published an image juxtaposing a photograph of a smiling George Zimmerman posing in shirt and tie with one purportedly showing an older, shirtless Trayvon Martin flipping off the camera, with an accompanying caption reading: "Because nothing says fair like putting a mugshot looking photo in "county orange" next to a 5-year-old picture of the victim as a child. But hey, two can play that game":
***
The kicker? The photo on the right was of a different Trayvon Martin. One that was still alive and in no way related to the deceased. [T]he photo in question came from a Facebook profile belonging to a living breathing, middle-finger-flipping Trayvon Martin who lists his school as Myers Middle School, not Dr. Michael M. Krop Senior High School. Additionally, all of his relatives are listed as living in Savannah, Georgia. The late [Trayvon] Martin grew up in Miami Gardens.
Twitchy.com subsequently posted a correction, stating:
We made a mistake. The photo on the right is not of the Trayvon Martin who was shot by Zimmerman. We apologize to our readers and to the Martin family.
Another purported photograph of Trayvon Martin was circulated in beginning May 2012, supposedly documenting the claim that "little" Trayvon Martin was not as slight of build as suggested in older pictures but rather stood a full 6'2" and weighed 175 lbs at the time of the shooting:
One of my favorite rants...the liberal controlled media... television news... newspapers... magazines... radio... all continue to show 12 year old Trayvon... NOT 17 year old Trayvon... they continue to show the 5 year old picture BECAUSE it helps to cement in your mind the little, cute, Hoodie wearing youngster who was stalked by this monster.
In reality.."little Trayvon"...at the time of his death...stood almost 6'2" tall...weighed 175 muscular pounds.
That image was also not a photograph of Trayvon Martin at all, but rather a picture of rapper Jayceon Terrell Taylor, better known by his stage name Game. The confusion apparently came about because the latter's photo was used to accompany articles in which he commented on the Trayvon Martin shooting, and someone later erroneously conflated his image with Trayvon Martin's name.
The medical examiner's report on the death of Trayvon Martin indicated that the deceased was actually 5'11" and weighed 158 lbs., and he had two tattoos, none of which was on his face, neck, or the back of his hands (one was on his right arm and the other on his left wrist).
As far as we know the following is the last pre-mortem photograph of Trayvon Martin (shown standing on the far right), a picture taken as he posed with family members gathered for his mother's birthday nine days before he was shot and killed:
Originally posted by litterbaux
I agree you can't make any judgements about what happened because you were not there. What I'll disagree with is how anyone can just sit on the sideline and not have some kind of opinion.
The media showing pictures of a young Treyvon making it seem like he was 12 years old. The constant mentioning the fact he had skittles. The constant white v.s. black racism issue. They were purposely trying to persuade the viewers opinions. They were purposely pulling at the viewers heart strings. They wanted this to be a race issue, they wanted riots.
They get away with it. I know nothing will happen. There are enough morons in this world that will still watch the garbage.
I don't have any opinion on the outcome of the case, I wasn't there so I can't be sure. What I do know is that the media is nothing more than violance cheer leaders. They are two faced liars that will say one thing and do another. If this isn't apparent to everyone after this case, there is no hope.
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by jude11
Dear jude11,
I think I misunderstand you. I didn't have to be there to "know" whether the result was fair. We "know" what the state has to prove in order to convict for second degree murder. We "know" what evidence was presented. Besides our own opinions, we "know" what the vast majority of legal analysts said about the case.
But as I say, I might be misunderstanding you.
With respect,
Charles1952.
But do we know Trayvon was the one terrorizing the neighborhood?
Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by jude11
Dear jude11,
Thanks. I think I get your point now. It seems you're saying that much (if not almost all) of the nation had picked their sides before the evidence was in. Agreed.
Ok, I'm a little slow, thanks for the nudge.
With respect,
Charles1952