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.

 

Why Zimmerman is Guilty

page: 26
101
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tiger5
Sadly the simple fact is despit ehis obvious faults which I would say are a bigotted view of black young men and his obvious lies Zimmerman was tried and found guilty. Our system of justice can have flaws but it is the best we have until we have the mind reading machine (not the polygraph).



A bigoted view of black men...... Please explain how you arrived at that conclusion? Funny how the FBI investigated this to determine if it was a hate crime, and came to the conclusion that race played no part. Even though the feds really want this to be about race.

13% of the population are black...roughly half of those are males. Yet 40% of those imprisoned are black males. Roughly 7% of black males age 25-39 were in prison in 2011. In major US cities as many as 80% of young black males have a criminal record. A US DOJ study done in 2011 concluded that blacks are 8 times as likely to commit a violent crime. I could go on.

I just stated facts that are readily available online.... Now, call me a racist for pointing out the truth.




posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by cbaskins
I am legally blind and have taken the bus and walked everywere my whole life. It would have been an injustice if George was convicted of murder, but I agree totally with a manslaughter verdict. Going back to being a full time pedestrian, when someone gets out of a car it is there fault. Once a guy thought that I was staring at him when he was in a car driving by, but I only have 45 percent of my vision left, and I tried to explain that to him. With him being a young punk and beginning to get out of his car, I began to attack him in order to get the upper hand, and not to mention I was scared. Moral of the story is, stay in the car or get delt with. Its the law! SF


You might be right in common sense. But, in terms of the law you are wrong. You have no right to expect privacy in a public area. I might be stupid to follow a person around my neighborhood, but I can literally follow them step for step all over God green public earth. They have NO right to assault me. And if they choose to assault me I will defend myself.

You all who defend Trayvon and believe Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter are just emotionally reacting. The jury was not allowed to do that. It matters what the law says. You all also seem to think that Zimmerman has some perverted need to follow black men around. The facts of the case say that Mr. Zimmerman felt Trayvon was acting suspicious. He gave answers to the dispatchers questions. He did not say, "I am following this punk ass black boy who's wearing a hoodie and I know he's up to know good, and I hope I can badger him into attacking me so I can shoot and kill him." Yet, that seems to be the story you want to believe.

Hindsight is 20/20. Zimmerman cared about all of his neighbors including Trayvon. How can I say this? Because he did not know Trayvon was living in his neighborhood and yet he would have reported someone being suspicious around Trayvon's place of residence. He did not have it out for Trayvon. He thought he might be another one of those possible thieves, they always get away, and he wanted to make sure the cops could check him out. End of story.

It was Trayvon who took offense and attacked Zimmerman who was put in a life and death struggle and shot him. That is classic self defense.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tiger5
Sadly the simple fact is despit ehis obvious faults which I would say are a bigotted view of black young men and his obvious lies Zimmerman was tried and found guilty. Our system of justice can have flaws but it is the best we have until we have the mind reading machine (not the polygraph).



What bigoted view of black young men??? There was zero evidence of that.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
To hell with Trayvon and to hell with Zimmerman,
the guy is dead, and the other guy walks. Big deal.
ATS has turned into a sickening tabloid where people obsessed
with social pornography can jerk each other off.
Oh yeah, and to anyone reading this,
to hell with you too.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:16 PM
link   
This is really disheartening. Judging by many of the responses on here there seems to be a lot of people in this country that think they would be justified to attack anyone they perceive as following them.

They even seem to think it would be legal for them to do so. It is a good thing George was found innocent or I think there would be a rash of brutal attacks on people across the country because those people’s ideas would have been reinforced.

I can just imagine people getting beaten at every street corner because they just happen to be walking in the same direction as their assailant. Then when those assailants were arrested for aggravated assault they would simply say they thought they were justified based off of what happened with Martin.

Well even with the court proving that isn’t true with the Zimmerman case there seems to still be people who think different. Makes me glad I have a CCW permit who know what some uneducated idiot may do if they think I am following them even with all the coverage the trial got.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 





Originally posted by Deetermined Did you watch or read about the trial? Tell me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it suggested that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman from behind while he was on the phone with 911 and heading back to his vehicle? Didn't this line up with what was recorded on the 911 call?

your response


No...Zimmerman has made many claims, but that is not one of them and he wasn't on the phone with 911 when the fight broke out. Zimmerman claims he didn't know the main street in his community and that he approached TM to ask the street name. He also claim Trayvon appeared out of nowhere...or jumped out of the bushes...or simply appeared from the darkness.

as you say, GZ, has made many statements, all but one that i know of with out a lawyer present. and they are are fairly consent. even the lead detective, chris sernio testified in court that GZ statements where consent, and only a few inconsistencies, which is normal after a event as people recall or can't recall something. you can go and pull some videos to see this. also if you watch the reenactment video( which i will provide below) you plainly hear at the about the 7:30 mark. you hear GZ say " he yelled from behind me" and then from the 7:36 to the 8:06 mark, he says what TM said to him and what TM did. now if that's not him saying the same as" coming out from behind". i don't know what is. and don't try to nit pick, you and everybody with a open mind get's the gist of what he is saying.

and your words here.


Zimmerman claims he didn't know the main street in his community and that he approached TM to ask the street name

this is a half truth with a a flat out lie put into it. yes GZ did say that he was looking for a address, but no where and i repeat nowhere did he say he approached TM to ask for a address. please so me a source, a direct quote, a interview any thing where he said this. besides if he would have said this, the state would have jumped all over it in the trial. please tell me where you hear him get out of the truck, and ask TM for a address in the 911 call i will provide below, mind you this is the very first call made that night.also look at the reenactment again and you will see at about 6:01 min mark you hear him say that," i still thought i could use their address if i walked all the way through" or something to that effect.

also listen carefully at about the 6:26 mark to the 6:53 mark. no GZ never approached TM to ask him for a address.


TM girlfriend was on the phone with him and cell records prove it. Her testimony is that he did not make it home.

man did you even bother to check your facts, or are just hoping that people will just over look your lies and half truths. and hope they wouldn't call you on it.
take this part for instance


TM girlfriend was on the phone with him and cell records prove it,

yes it is true TM was on the phone with r jeantel. for 4 minutes.
but this part. is another blatant lie.


Her testimony is that he did not make it home.

in her testimony she plainly states that TM told her, he was by his daddy's house. and she asked him to go inside and he told her nah. i can't remember all of that part of it but i know there are video's of her on the stand when GZ lawyer pressed her and she said it. you can go and pull them if you want, i personally can't sit through her testimony again. she also said that TM spoke to GZ first. which corroborates GZ statements.
now like i said i'll only provide a few links, the rest you'll have to find your self.


oh and here is a little map i made in the zimmerman trial thread. i have edited part of the post but will provide the link to it.



the red square where the fight started.
the black rectangle is GZ truck.
the green rectangle is where TM was staying.
blue dash line is the street to the back entrance.
yellow dash lines are four ways TM could have made it home.

in the 911 call GZ says he is coming to check me out, then a sort time later he's running, dispatcher says which way, GZ says towards the back entrance. he also says the same thing in the reenactment but gives more details.
jeantel stated that TM told her he was near the area of his daddy house. lets just leave the reenactment out for now and go with the 911 call, many people say that he is lying in the reenactment, i don't think that people think he is in the 911 call, if i'm wrong please pardon me.. we'll also jeantel statement.

so if you look at the map you see that if TM went towards the back entrance, the house he was staying in is the second town house on the corner of the side walk. , or going around to the next street and going in the front. you can see that there are cut throughs that he could have taken to get to the back or the front.
we know he was there by his daddy house, jeantel said he told her so. i count four.

so he had many different avenues to escape the "creepy a@@ cracker"

so if he was so scared of the "creepy a@@ cracker" why go back to the T? why didn't he go inside? he had lost GZ, jeantel said he told her so. if he was scared, why not call 911 from inside the house where GZ couldn't see him?

did he want to see if GZ was still parked there? did he feel played by GZ? did he see GZ walk by the T?

just why did he go back? i think we all know why, he wanted to whip him some "creepy a22 cracker" a@@!

link to post
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 17-7-2013 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by LionOfGOD
To hell with Trayvon and to hell with Zimmerman,
the guy is dead, and the other guy walks. Big deal.
ATS has turned into a sickening tabloid where people obsessed
with social pornography can jerk each other off.
Oh yeah, and to anyone reading this,
to hell with you too.


i am actually leaning to this frame of mind! you make some excellent points! trayvon and zimmerman were both punks. they both had time to change. oh well.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie


oh and here is a little map i made in the zimmerman trial thread. i have edited part of the post but will provide the link to it.


So...looking at the map, I would be curious to know which entrance is closest to the store Trayvon went for his skittles?



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   


So...looking at the map, I would be curious to know which entrance is closest to the store Trayvon went for his skittles?


IIRC, the store would be off the right of that map/pic. The nearest entrance was the front, which appears at the bottom of the pic.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by bbracken677

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie


oh and here is a little map i made in the zimmerman trial thread. i have edited part of the post but will provide the link to it.


So...looking at the map, I would be curious to know which entrance is closest to the store Trayvon went for his skittles?


look to the right. you see a entrance there next to the street. the club house is straight around the little curve ahead on the right.
edit on 17-7-2013 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
It amazes me when reading what some people think are facts in this case. It appears some here believe that there are witnesses that saw the whole thing and are certain about what happened. That simply is not true. There are only two people who know what happened that night and one of them is dead.

Here are two facts. Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. Martin was unarmed.

Someone suggests that Zimmerman was doing his job. This is not true. I repeat this is not true. As a neighborhood watch volunteer he is to report any suspicious activity to the police. That is all Zimmerman is not trained to pursue or question anyone relating to their presence in the neighborhood. This lack of training is woefully evident in the way he conducted himself that night. He should never have acted in anyway to contact or confront Martin. And should any contact be inadvertently made, Zimmerman should have sated his purpose and identified himself as a watch volunteer. Zimmerman's actions were reckless and full of false bravado.

I ask anyone here to place themselves in Martin's position. And just to add a little spice to the scenario, let's say the person in the car was a black man. I'm just guessing in this case the woman juror who is doing all the talking on television now, the one who can't understand why Martin would be threatened, would be soiling her underwear.

This whole event was a tragic situation, and I believe is an example of why there should be greater controls on just who should be allowed to carry a gun.

And here's a tip folks if you ever find you want kill someone, make sure they are dead, then scratch the back of you head just enough to make it bleed and then maybe bonk yourself in the nose just enough to get a little blood flowing. Finally claim self defense.

Zimmerman was a wussy who put himself into a situation he couldn't handle and took the cowards way out and shot an unarmed boy. End of story.


edit on 17-7-2013 by okyouwin because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-7-2013 by okyouwin because: meaning



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:56 PM
link   
So, what was the legal issue of Zimmerman following Trayvon? Did the prosecutor object to the questions? So, what is the truth about Zimmerman's actions leading up to Trayvon's attacking him?




posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
So, what was the legal issue of Zimmerman following Trayvon? Did the prosecutor object to the questions? So, what is the truth about Zimmerman's actions leading up to Trayvon's attacking him?



perfectly legal.
he did nothing wrong.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Willtell
I started the thread but at this time will apologize to anyone that I wrote anything they deemed offensive.

In the trenches of verbal battle sometimes I go too far
Forgive me!
goodnight


Apologize my left foot...

There can be no apology for the utter lack of mental effort placed in your OP and follow up responses to any member who has taken the time to post here in this SKUNK WORK.

In order for there to be a battle of any sort, one must be armed with appropriate tools. In this case, you should be armed with facts, discernment, and critical thinking skills.

In the formulation of this OP and the follow up responses, I can find no evidence of tools.

This is not a personal attack. This is simply an analysis of the writing in this thread. Perhaps other writings of yours have demonstrated the presence of these tools.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by totallackey

Originally posted by Willtell
I started the thread but at this time will apologize to anyone that I wrote anything they deemed offensive.

In the trenches of verbal battle sometimes I go too far
Forgive me!
goodnight


Apologize my left foot...

There can be no apology for the utter lack of mental effort placed in your OP and follow up responses to any member who has taken the time to post here in this SKUNK WORK.

In order for there to be a battle of any sort, one must be armed with appropriate tools. In this case, you should be armed with facts, discernment, and critical thinking skills.

In the formulation of this OP and the follow up responses, I can find no evidence of tools.

This is not a personal attack. This is simply an analysis of the writing in this thread. Perhaps other writings of yours have demonstrated the presence of these tools.


My apology was not for the truth of my op. It is irrefutable. It’s just that people like you I have unfortunately called an idiot because of your myopic views.
That I will apologize for not the facts of the op.
Also, I didnt originally put this in the skunk works the people here on ATS moved it here.
edit on 17-7-2013 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Willtell



My apology was not for the truth of my op. It is irrefutable. It’s just that people like you I have unfortunately called an idiot because of your myopic views.
That I will apologize for not the facts of the op.
Also, I didnt originally put this in the skunk works the people here on ATS moved it here.
edit on 17-7-2013 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



The OP is full of holes and suppositions...few facts.

The evidence was presented at the trial...other suppositions beyond that is just that: suppositions.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Willtell
 


I have to give you some credit for coming back.

Now, go to page 15 and answers those questions as I am curious to your answers.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 04:34 PM
link   
he was found innocent of the charges he was brought up on, that doesnt make him "innocent" of doing wrong, it makes him innocent of that charge, manslaughter or assualt with a deadly weapon maybe, the issue is when you portray him as an innocent boy minding his own youre relying on the character of the boy, if he has been charged with or questioned in the past its hard to pass as innocent boy minding his own, he may not look so innocent when you bring up any school fights or suspensions, not saying he is a bad kid or deserved to be killed, do i think a neighborhood watch guy needs to patrol with a loaded gun, sure its his right hes licensed but under the same reasoning " i followed a suspicious teenager due to recent break ins" would assume you automatically portrayed him as a threat, a robber lookin to steal your property, fine no problem i get ya i might have passed the same off as i too live in a "white" neighborhood, however that allows him to view an armed man stalking him from a vehicle as a murderer, after all your following a boy with the intent that he may be a threat i too at the age of 17 wouldve have felt threatened, and yeah had you got out lookin fro trouble id have swung at you too, guess that makes me a menace too so shoot me. sorry i feel he got let off easy only due to you couldnt prove he cold blooded murdered how ever i feel manslaughter shouldve been pushed because yeah a fat mexican guy couldve pistol whipped the boy and been done instead he managed to pull it out of its holster, unlock the safety, loaded one into the chamber.... sorry a pistol whip wouldve saved a life and served the same purpose and been twice as fast, unless its ok to walk around with your safety off and one in the chamber then yes a quick draw and fire is fine i guess if you can live with killing someone to save your tv or bluray player.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by okyouwin
It amazes me when reading what some people think are facts in this case. It appears some here believe that there are witnesses that saw the whole thing and are certain about what happened. That simply is not true. There are only two people who know what happened that night and one of them is dead.


Actually, there are a lot of witnesses, and we have a lot of information and we know some of what happened. Just like accounts of a big party. Everyone has a story to tell. Does not mean the party did not happen. Just different takes, from different angles, and perspectives.


Here are two facts. Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. Martin was unarmed.


Martin did not have a FIREarm. But it is obvious that Martin did not believe himself to be helpless. Look at the very premise the OP is wanting us to believe. The OP wants us to believe that Martin, IN FULL KNOWLEDGE of the presence of an armed Zimmerman, WANTED TO DO BATTLE.


Someone suggests that Zimmerman was doing his job. This is not true. I repeat this is not true. As a neighborhood watch volunteer he is to report any suspicious activity to the police.

He did.

That is all Zimmerman is not trained to pursue or question anyone relating to their presence in the neighborhood. This lack of training is woefully evident in the way he conducted himself that night. He should never have acted in anyway to contact or confront Martin.

There is no evidence Zimmerman initiated any contact with Martin. There is evidence Martin sought out Zimmerman once he spotted Zimmerman behind him. His phone conversation with Rachel indicated both he and Rachel thought Zimmerman might be a male rapist. There is evidence that Martin was going to go beat down what he thought was male rapist...

And should any contact be inadvertently made, Zimmerman should have sated his purpose and identified himself as a watch volunteer.

How do you know he did not identify himself as a neighborhood watch volunteer?

Zimmerman's actions were reckless and full of false bravado.

Nothing reckless at all or he would have been charged with some form of recklessness, the way the media has been clamoring for his hide...and certainly no false bravado demonstrated by plugging Martin with a 9mm bullet. ACTUAL AND REAL BRAVADO!!! That is what you are whining about right?

I ask anyone here to place themselves in Martin's position.

Why would I want to place myself in the position of an ignorant, hoodie wearin, wannabe thug kid?

And just to add a little spice to the scenario, let's say the person in the car was a black man. I'm just guessing in this case the woman juror who is doing all the talking on television now, the one who can't understand why Martin would be threatened, would be soiling her underwear.

Your point is that all of us, "creepy *snip* crackers," should be walkin around in fear of a black man behind the wheel of an automobile?

This whole event was a tragic situation, and I believe is an example of why there should be greater controls on just who should be allowed to carry a gun.

It is only tragic because you want to make it tragic. As I wrote earlier, personally, I will celebrate every time read of a thug, gangster, crip, wannabe, getting shot and killed. For the most part, it is they who are doing most of the killing of each other. Why is that not as tragic as this? Where is the outcry over those killings?

As far as controls, I will quote Todd (Keanu Reeves) in the movie Parenthood, "You know, Mrs. Buckman, you need a license to buy a dog, to drive a car - hell, you even need a license to catch a fish. But they'll let any butt-reaming asshole be a father." It is obvious the parents of Trayvon Martin were not the concerned parents until after the shooting.


And here's a tip folks if you ever find you want kill someone, make sure they are dead, then scratch the back of you head just enough to make it bleed and they maybe bonk yourself in the nose just enough to get a little blood flowing.


Sophistry and poppycock...


Zimmerman was a wussy who got himself into a situation he couldn't handle and took the cowards way out and shot an unarmed man. End of story.


Thank God the unarmed man he shot was actually a thug wannabe and would have likely ended up in jail for some crime he committed in pursuit of supporting his drug habit... Now, do you promise this is the end of your story?



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by bryono
 


Well I was considering what you had to say up until I realized you didn't have the facts strait.

I suggest you read up or watch the trial especially the part where they talk about the pistol.

If you are not inclined to research for yourself I will summarize.

The gun had a built in safety on the trigger which only means the trigger pull is a little harder than other pistols with external safeties. Another thing is I would say 98% of people including myself keep a round in the chamber of our conceal carry pistols otherwise carrying doesn't make much sense. George also carried with a round pre-loaded in the chamber so the part you described of him going through all the steps to shoot were not the case at all. It was as simple as aim and shoot.



new topics

top topics



 
101
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join