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.

 

Zimmerman...Trayvon...Do You REALLY Know? No...You Don't.

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 09:25 PM
link   
It all comes down to this:

"Vindicated" vs "Robbed"
Guilty vs Innocent
White vs Black
Right vs Wrong
Justice vs Injustice
White vs Black
Propaganda vs Agenda (Gun Control)

and on and on and on.

So where's my rant?

It's here:

Not only here on ATS (Where it should actually be less so) but all over the World and into the void of cyberspace...YAY!!!!! We WON!!!! or DAMN RACISTS!!!!!!

But the real issue I have is with those who "Absolutely know" justice has either been served or denied.

So...How the hell do you REALLY know? Were you there? Did you witness anything? DID YOU SEE THE INCIDENT UNFOLDING??? All answers to this are a resounding NO.

I wasn't there so I can't say. Why is it then that so many who are in the same boat can claim an otherwise conviction of certainty? Simple...You can't...period.

Do we have our opinions? Tendencies? Preferences? We all do. But shouldn't we also have the absolute need for the truth and for that truth to mete out justice? Of course. Will we see it in this case? No. It's too tainted politically, racially and in some areas religiously. There can never be a fair trial in America when it gets to the media because America loves reality trash TV and we all know who the stars are.

In this case the stars are reporters, anchors, lawyers, the judge, black, white, Washington...How can anyone expect a fair trial? In this case the trial was a farce from the beginning when it was propped up by Obama sticking his nose in the middle looking for another opportunity to stir the pot to push the damn gun agenda.

Sorry...got going there for a second.


Point: No one knows what happened but everyone is certain that justice was either seen or ignored. This is what we have become. We can accuse, try and fry anyone from our arm chairs without being witness to something so mundane as facts.

We can be assured that we knew all along what the outcome would be because we told our friends, colleagues etc. We just knew for a fact. Innocent or guilty...we knew even before the courts, the jury had anything in their hands to deliberate and dissect. And when a statement is made in either defense? "He lied" "That's not what happened" "BS" ...and yet, you weren't there.

When I witnessed the outcome of the trial that was one thing...when I saw so many here on ATS claiming justice was served...How do you know?

When I witnessed the opposite that justice was denied...how do you know?

Answer in both cases...YOU DON'T KNOW BECAUSE YOU WERE NOT THERE. You weren't even in the court room, the judge's chambers, the jury room, the evidence locker...

Two people, one dead and one life in the balance. Family, friends, no more. They all deserve more IMO.

So in closing. you don't know. Never could have and most likely never will.

You only hoped for whatever outcome you desired.

Peace



edit on 14-7-2013 by jude11 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:05 PM
link   
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.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   
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)



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:17 PM
link   
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.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:20 PM
link   

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.


Thanks.

I won't take sides here because I simply DO NOT know.

I was a victim to the same news coverage/lies/propaganda and yet, I still couldn't say or think anything with absolute conviction simply because I wasn't there.



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.

Emotions run high, facts get distorted, rumors override. Zimmerman had a nice line up of lawyers to get the story straight while the black community was still reeling in the aftermath of yet another youth shot to death at the hands of a white man.

But...Each side knew for sure what happened while not one of those people were actually there.

Neither was I.

Peace



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:23 PM
link   

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.


And that's all we know while so many just absolutely know everything else that happened. Even 3,000 miles away, people know for a fact.

But what we don't know is why. Because we weren't witness to that night.

Peace



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:25 PM
link   
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.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:33 PM
link   

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)


All valid Boncho.


But do we know Trayvon was the one terrorizing the neighborhood?

And for the record, I never called anyone of these men a loser. Just to be clear.

"Cracker" is one thing..."Creepy" leads us further. But again, I wasn't there.

I have seen a lot of little wannabe rich white kids refer to themselves as "Gangsta"...Thanks to Hollywood.

And Zimmerman may have just been a paranoid wannabe Paul Blart that would label anyone in the dark as "Suspicious".

But I don't know because I wasn't there.

The point I'm trying to make is that so many took the stance of "knowing" absolutely without a doubt the guilt or innocence of either man without being there. Even before the trial.

Guilty before being proven innocent is what the Govt. uses on us and we shouldn't be using their template.

Peace



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:38 PM
link   
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.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:38 PM
link   

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.


Actually, the OP is about people "Knowing" before weighing in. They were used and steered by emotions, media, Govt., friends and family.

And when the verdict came down "I knew it" was heard across the World. Guilty or innocent doesn't matter. He was convicted or exonerated in the court of public opinion before the trial even got underway.

Wrong on so many counts.

As for me, I held my breath, watched and waited without forming an opinion.

Because I wasn't there.

Peace



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 

indeed jude, lot's of ignorance embraced in this case
especially from all the ignoramuses emphasizing Trayvons "thug pics"
which seem* to be of an entirely different individual with the same name

*in keeping with the subject of the op

not having seen this particular bit of ignorance denied but instead enthusiastically embraced, as if it justified murdering the kid, i hope you don't mind my posting this herein
www.snopes.com...


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:




posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 10:40 PM
link   

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.


Opinion is one thing. Absolute conviction before the facts is quite another.

As for the rest of your post...
Agreed.

Peace



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 11:01 PM
link   
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.



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 11:16 PM
link   

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.


A slight misunDerstaning an I probably coulD have my case more clear but I Don't know how to state it to be that much more clear.


My point is that the case was DeciDeD in the court of public opinion before it reacheD the courts of justice. It was clear in many minDs Due to racism, propaganDa, meDia, Govt, personal feelings, religion...whatever the reason.

AnD the verDict came. Many rejoiceD.

Because they "Knew". How is this even possible? Look at the worD. "Knew" is absolute.

IMO, No one can "Know" without being there but so many claimeD it as such because of outsiDe influences anD personal convictions, feelings, emotions...

This is tantamount to clairvoyance on a global scale.

Sorry "D" on my boarD is cutting up again...


Peace



posted on Jul, 14 2013 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by jude11


But do we know Trayvon was the one terrorizing the neighborhood?


 


I wasn't implying he was (although it's possible he knew the other kids can't say on that issue.)

The rest of my points were from evidence released in the trial. Or evidence released online during or after. I didn't really make many judgements before the trial.

I knew the facts were being manipulated by media. Once the trial was over however, I went back, read various sources on the incident.

The "Creepy ass cracker" statement was from Martin himself to his friend on the phone. The version of him getting home and heading back to Zimmerman was from his girlfriend.

What do I really know? I know what I have found which is stated as fact, and has been in the court of law. Or what I've found which was trying to be suppressed by media.

I think there is enough evidence out there to make an informed opinion. Perhaps it is indeed opinion, but as I said, at least now it can be informed. There is enough out there if you go looking for it.



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 12:17 AM
link   
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



posted on Jul, 15 2013 @ 01:44 AM
link   

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


Never slow...but right to ask IMO.

Yes, exactly what I've been saying. People chose siDes on the night in question. Later, many chose because of news, propaganDa, meDia etc.

AnD no one was there to witness.


Sorry. D is still screwing with my key boarD...


Peace


edit on 15-7-2013 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join