Zimmerman / Trayvon: Yeah, I'm sick of it too, but one Video you HAVE to see...

reply to post by IvanAstikov


I've been in a street fight. His story is fine. Its the teuly ignorant people are the ones that deny the evidwncw and are the minority that believe garbage based on emotion. If Trayvon were still alive he'd be in jail cfor attempted murder, assault, or murder. Zimmerman as justified and its been proven twice now. By the cops and then a judge and jury.

Also your opinion abour the damage is absurs b.s.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


His story is not "fine." If you understand the dynamics of a street confrontation and can put yourself in the position of a person seeking the location of someone believed to be a criminal and possibly violent, how do you explain how alarm bells weren't ringing in Zimmerman's head the second he heard Trayvon's voice and then turned around and saw him at least 6ft away?

What kind of a muppet would Zimmerman have to be to have not been backing towards the street immediately, and putting distance between himself and the possible threat? What kind of muppet would he have to be to have took his eye off this sudden threat to find his phone, supposedly to call police he alread knew were on the way? What kind of muppet would you have to be to get "sucker punched" by someone stood 6ft away and you have no reason to trust to get any nearer?

Why would you be so willing to accept such an unlikely explanation, especially when you know it's been over 2 minutes since he told the nen dispatcher that he was heading back to his truck? Why are you more inclined to believe that Trayvon went all the way down to the bottom of the T and back, than you are to accept the possibility that Trayvon was the person who stayed in the same place, and Zimmerman was doing the seeking?

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow


It might if you are struggling to sustain less damage. Do you agree with that?

Then it's not exactly a ground and pound, or much of a beating. If you are successful enough to not get even knocked out during 45 seconds of a big street thug smashing your head against the floor and slamming his fists into your face then you're hardly in danger.

Anyway, I doubt it's possible to defend yourself for that length of time against a street-hardened MMA fighter like Martin if you're Zimmerman. Which is why I think the story sounds like nonsense.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes

 

Nobody's paying any attention to anybody claiming Zimmerman had no injuries at all. The non-developmentally challenged kids are discussing whether the injuries he had matched up to the beating he described himself getting, and the smartest kids are thinking "This story stinks," while the less smart ones, the one's who've never been in a street fight, and the one's with a vested interest in believing Zimmerman, are thinking "Yeah, that makes complete sense."

"Nobody"? A lot of foolish people are paying attention to the nonsensical claims that he sustained no injuries. Some even claim he faked them.

The injuries match up VERY WELL with fight injuries. I have SEEN a fight where someone had their head pounded into pavement (in that case, blacktop), and that guy's head (who was struggling) looked very much like that of Mr, Zimmerman. I don't know of anyone, save Mr. Zimmerman and his family, that has a "vested interest" in his story. Plus, it isn't a matter of "believing" him, but of looking at all the evidence, including all that the prosecution tried to suppress, and seeing that it matches his claims of what happened. Those interested in REAL justice, and not motivated by racial nonsense, have been interested in the truth, and the truth was seen, and he was acquitted. Those are the facts. All your attempts to obfuscate the facts won't change a thing.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
His story is not "fine." If you understand the dynamics of a street confrontation and can put yourself in the position of a person seeking the location of someone believed to be a criminal and possibly violent, how do you explain how alarm bells weren't ringing in Zimmerman's head the second he heard Trayvon's voice and then turned around and saw him at least 6ft away?

He clearly believed Martin was a possible criminal; hence the call to the dispatcher. As for violent, as far as he knew when he exited the car, the "guy" was long gone. That's what he stated, because that's what he saw regularly. From where do you get a distance of "at least 6ft away"?

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
What kind of a muppet would Zimmerman have to be to have not been backing towards the street immediately, and putting distance between himself and the possible threat? What kind of muppet would he have to be to have took his eye off this sudden threat to find his phone, supposedly to call police he alread knew were on the way? What kind of muppet would you have to be to get "sucker punched" by someone stood 6ft away and you have no reason to trust to get any nearer?

Do you really believe that these continued insults towards an innocent man further your argument? Allow be to dissuade you of that notion. They make you look petty. Martin didn't come up from a distance away, but from RIGHT THERE, because, as even his own friend supports, he went back to confront Mr. Zimmerman. This teen, with drug habits that cause violence, and a long record of trouble(that would have been reported as CRIMINAL, had the Miami-Dade school police not been corrupt, and in the practice of covering up such crimes), punched Mr, Zimmerman, assaulted him for NO legal reason, and was shot as a result, legally and justly. That is what the law stated, and still states, and that is what all the evidence, even in a kangaroo court, showed to be true. Justice and truth won. You SHOULD be grateful for that.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
Why are you more inclined to believe that Trayvon went all the way down to the bottom of the T and back, than you are to accept the possibility that Trayvon was the person who stayed in the same place, and Zimmerman was doing the seeking?

The testimony of his friend supports the conclusion that he went back and attacked Mr. Zimmerman. Try listening to it. I recommend a headache remedy close at hand, though.

reply to post by LadyGreenEyes


Life's too short to be responding to your every comment here, so I'll just address these 2.

As for violent, as far as he knew when he exited the car, the "guy" was long gone.

If that was the case, why did he tell the dispatcher he didn't want to give out his full address, because he didn't know where this kid was? That would clearly suggest he thought Trayvon was near enough to overhear his conversation on the phone, at least. The idea that he'd show such concern, then as soon as he ended his call, he would completely drop his guard and allow himself to be jumped, is a sick joke.

Do you really believe that these continued insults towards an innocent man further your argument?

He was found "not guilty," NOT "proven innocent." There's a massive difference. If he was innocent and had told the truth about his encounter, that would at least make him the most incompetent NW guy in Florida, unless they are graded by how many suspects they kill.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes

 

Life's too short to be responding to your every comment here, so I'll just address these 2.

As for violent, as far as he knew when he exited the car, the "guy" was long gone.

If that was the case, why did he tell the dispatcher he didn't want to give out his full address, because he didn't know where this kid was? That would clearly suggest he thought Trayvon was near enough to overhear his conversation on the phone, at least. The idea that he'd show such concern, then as soon as he ended his call, he would completely drop his guard and allow himself to be jumped, is a sick joke.

Do you really believe that these continued insults towards an innocent man further your argument?

He was found "not guilty," NOT "proven innocent." There's a massive difference. If he was innocent and had told the truth about his encounter, that would at least make him the most incompetent NW guy in Florida, unless they are graded by how many suspects they kill.

The address worries were certainly valid, were they not? None of that shows that Mr, Zimmerman would have had any time to flee, as you imply. None of that states that he was doing anything other than what he believed he was asked to do. The dispatcher did state, under oath, that he could understand how his statements might indicate that he wanted Mr. Zimmerman to get out to see in which direction "the guy" had headed. That isn't evidence that he was not worried about a possible problem. Nor is that a justification for his being assaulted. Blaming the victim? Really? George Zimmerman was a victim of assault, that managed to shoot is assailant. Calling him names, and pretending that his actions made the assault somehow right or legal, aren't valid arguments. You didn't address my question about the insults, which you quoted. He was acquitted, which means he's NOT guilty, thus, for all practical and LEGAL purposes, INNOCENT. Innocent until proven guilty is the standard. Shown not guilty thus means innocent. Nor does being assaulted make him "incompetent". In fact, I would say his actions in stopping the assault, and as it turned out, preventing any others by that assailant, make him very competent indeed. Plus, he isn't a cop. I will simply guess that your true reason for not addressing all my points is that you have nothing with which to refute them. Since this continues to be the case, why not simply accept that he committed no crime, and let this rest?

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
The address worries were certainly valid, were they not?

Not really, if he was at the eastern end of the T and he'd last saw Trayvon heading south down the upright of the T. Where could Trayvon have been hiding where he could possibly overhear Zimmerman, if Zimmerman was stood on Retreat View Circle?

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
None of that shows that Mr, Zimmerman would have had any time to flee, as you imply.

Who was saying anything about Zimmerman having to flee? Zimmerman would have had to be really stupid to think of fleeing, seeing as he'd already implicated himself by reporting an incident.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
None of that states that he was doing anything other than what he believed he was asked to do. The dispatcher did state, under oath, that he could understand how his statements might indicate that he wanted Mr. Zimmerman to get out to see in which direction "the guy" had headed.

So, getting out of his vehicle was the only way he could tell which way Trayvon had gone, despite him already having told the dispatcher the suspect was heading to the back entrance... like all the other assholes he'd reported.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
That isn't evidence that he was not worried about a possible problem. Nor is that a justification for his being assaulted.

That's right, it wouldn't be - if that's what really happened.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Blaming the victim? Really? George Zimmerman was a victim of assault, that managed to shoot is assailant.

You only have Zimmerman's word that Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman first. That may be good enough for you and an all female Floridian jury, but it's not enough for me.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Calling him names, and pretending that his actions made the assault somehow right or legal, aren't valid arguments.

True, but calling him names is the least he deserves.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
You didn't address my question about the insults, which you quoted. He was acquitted, which means he's NOT guilty, thus, for all practical and LEGAL purposes, INNOCENT. Innocent until proven guilty is the standard. Shown not guilty thus means innocent.

Shown "not guilty" when there has been a profesional investigation is a different matter. Only the most biased observer could deny this case was error-strewn from the outset.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Nor does being assaulted make him "incompetent". In fact, I would say his actions in stopping the assault, and as it turned out, preventing any others by that assailant, make him very competent indeed.

His actions weren't those of a competent person by any stretch of the imagination. Even his remarkable recovery to gain control of his gun only came after his alleged attacker reminded him he was carrying one

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Plus, he isn't a cop.

Never said he was.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
I will simply guess that your true reason for not addressing all my points is that you have nothing with which to refute them. Since this continues to be the case, why not simply accept that he committed no crime, and let this rest?

No, the reason is exactly what I stated. I could quite easily address every point you made, but I'd be wasting my time with someone as fixed in their opinion as yourself.

And, yes, you're right - I'm fixed in my opinion that Zimmerman has got away with unlawfully killing a teenager.

Reading through the thread pretty much points out how correct the dude on this video I link to below is....

www.youtube.com...

Yeah, I'm pretty much beyond sick of it too, I really, really, really wish I would have had to work today....But no, I had to come here and end up with a migraine after reading a bunch of opinions about something that, in truth, isn't really all that important anyway.

Stuff like this happens every single day everywhere, and it always has.

How long ago was that verdict handed down?, and it's still here?.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by IvanAstikov

 

I've been in a street fight. His story is fine. Its the teuly ignorant people are the ones that deny the evidwncw and are the minority that believe garbage based on emotion. If Trayvon were still alive he'd be in jail cfor attempted murder, assault, or murder. Zimmerman as justified and its been proven twice now. By the cops and then a judge and jury.

Also your opinion abour the damage is absurs b.s.

edit on 13-8-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

he would not be in jail for murder and he wouldn't have killed zimmerman, the cops were there within minutes. worse case scenario trayvon would have gotten a battery charge. best case scenario having heard trayvons version of events all charges would have been dropped with zimmerman walking away with a couple of lumps.

reply to post by conspiracy nut


Exactly. If Zimmerman had allowed Trayvon to continue beating him, at the rate of damage Trayvon was causing, he could have survived another 45 seconds easily, especially considering Trayvon must have been due an adrenaline dump after all that frantic pounding and slamming.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
Not really, if he was at the eastern end of the T and he'd last saw Trayvon heading south down the upright of the T. Where could Trayvon have been hiding where he could possibly overhear Zimmerman, if Zimmerman was stood on Retreat View Circle?

LOTS of places. Check out pictures of the area.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
Who was saying anything about Zimmerman having to flee? Zimmerman would have had to be really stupid to think of fleeing, seeing as he'd already implicated himself by reporting an incident.

You did.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
So, getting out of his vehicle was the only way he could tell which way Trayvon had gone, despite him already having told the dispatcher the suspect was heading to the back entrance... like all the other assholes he'd reported.

Duh? Did you ever look at pictures of the area? "The guy" (Martin" was between the buildings, and thus it wasn't possible to know for certain which way he'd headed.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
That isn't evidence that he was not worried about a possible problem. Nor is that a justification for his being assaulted.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
That's right, it wouldn't be - if that's what really happened.

That Mr. Zimmerman had real injuries, and Martin had NO fight injuries save to a HAND, and that witnesses saw the assault in progress, support that claim.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
You only have Zimmerman's word that Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman first. That may be good enough for you and an all female Floridian jury, but it's not enough for me.

No, we have evidence of assault, an assailant with a history of violence and drug use, and witnesses to the assault in progress. What do you think, that George grabbed poor Trayvon by the collar, pulled him down up top of himself, and forced him t start punching? We have to go with the most plausible scenario here.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
True, but calling him names is the least he deserves.

What he deserves is respect, as an American citizen, and the victim of an assault. Name calling resolves nothing.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
Shown "not guilty" when there has been a profesional investigation is a different matter. Only the most biased observer could deny this case was error-strewn from the outset.

There was a professional investigation. Even with errors on the part of those collecting evidence (not bagging Martin's hands, bagging his clothing wet, not using any tests for residual blood on the scene, etc.), Mr. Zimmerman was proven innocent. The errors worked against him, and they still had NO case for anything but self defense.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
His actions weren't those of a competent person by any stretch of the imagination. Even his remarkable recovery to gain control of his gun only came after his alleged attacker reminded him he was carrying one

No, he acted as someone reluctant to shoot, that wanted ANY other option, such as help from the police (en route), or from a neighbor. When he found he had NO other option, he fired. That is responsible.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
No, the reason is exactly what I stated. I could quite easily address every point you made, but I'd be wasting my time with someone as fixed in their opinion as yourself.

And, yes, you're right - I'm fixed in my opinion that Zimmerman has got away with unlawfully killing a teenager.

edit on 13-8-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)

Ah,so your reason is that you can't refute the evidence, presented by MANY people on site and other places, and in court, and you are so determined to believe that he's wrong, you refuse to accept any alternative. There is no point in debating with someone so close-minded on an issue. Expect no further responses.

You're right, it is pointless you responding to me, as you obviously believe everything Zimmerman said in defence of his actions that evening*, whereas I think he's a liar and a murderer, and it's obvious we are not going to have a meeting of minds on this.

* But, still somehow manage to incorporate blatant contradictions and lies such as, "he sucker-punched me straight onto my back and mounted me"/"he sucker punched me and I staggered 30 ft and then fell on my back" and "the suspect ran behind the building and then came back and circled my car while I was on the phone to the nen service." into your reasoning,