|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP. |
|
|
On March 24 2012 05:28 Lockitupv2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:24 CaptainFwiffo wrote:
Had a black man been the shooter, he would already be in jail. If the victim was not a young black male, the whole thing would have been handled differently by the cops. It has at least that much to do with race, even if Zimmerman is not racist. Is this a joke? Do you actually believe this?
Do you actually live in this country?
|
On March 24 2012 05:41 CaptainFwiffo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:28 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 24 2012 05:24 CaptainFwiffo wrote:
Had a black man been the shooter, he would already be in jail. If the victim was not a young black male, the whole thing would have been handled differently by the cops. It has at least that much to do with race, even if Zimmerman is not racist. Is this a joke? Do you actually believe this? Do you actually live in this country?
It is conjecture.
|
I had to stop watching. What a fool.
|
On March 24 2012 05:41 FREEloss_ca wrote:I had to stop watching. What a fool.
Just because 99% of TL is liberal doesn't mean he's a fool. Sorry.
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On March 24 2012 05:27 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:17 tree.hugger wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2012 04:53 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 04:48 awesomoecalypse wrote:On March 24 2012 04:42 Zaqwe wrote:On March 24 2012 04:32 awesomoecalypse wrote:When they neglect to mention that the shot was fired while Zimmerman was on the ground on his back screaming for help with Trayvon punching him in the head, how can it not be an exaggeration? You yourself have just exaggerated the story in the same way.
Anyone who tries to tell this story and just conveniently leaves out the part where Zimmerman is being pummeled and in danger of serious brain injuries or death is being dishonest. Nobody but Zimmerman has corroborated this, and in fact, several pieces of evidence outright contradict it. In particular the fact that Trayvon was on the phone with his girlfriend until just prior to the incident, and was evidently both afraid and attempting to get away. The idea that he would then suddenly hang up the phone, turn around and head back to attack Zimmerman--and then somehow overpower Zimmerman despite the fact that Zimmerman had just been stalking him and outweighed him by 100 lbs--is farcicle. edit: also no evidence supports that the shot was fired from that position, AND there are witnesses who said that zimmerman was straddling the kid right after the gunshot. now unless he fired the gun pushed the kid off him and then straddled him, there is no way that is true. This. Zimmerman's story has a million holes. The only eyewitness to the beating has corroborated Zimmerman's account of events. There aren't any holes in his story. Zimmerman was in danger of being seriously injured or killed by the beating. This is a clear cut case of self defense. Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John. John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot. "And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point." http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/seminole_news/022712-man-shot-and-killed-in-neighborhood-altercation This is bullshit. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/anderson-cooper-interviews-witnesses-to-trayvon-martin-shooting/
“So you heard some sort of whining, some sort of commotion outside?” Cooper asked.
“We were in the kitchen, with the window open and the blinds pulled. So we had complete view from outside,” Cutcher explained.
Cooper asked her what was the first thing she saw.
“By that time, you hear like a shot — like some other noise,” Lamilla described.
“You heard the gunshot?” Cooper interjected.
“Yeah, I run away from my backyard and when I just get into the point of my — like my screen, it stopped me, I look at the person on his knees on top of a body,” Lamilla elaborated.
“So you saw Mr. Zimmerman on top of Trayvon Martin?” Cooper questioned.
“Trayvon, exactly,” Lamilla said.
“When you say on top of, how so?” the CNN anchor pressed.
“Straddling him,” Cutcher replied.
“His legs were straddling him?” Cooper followed up.
Zimmerman was straddling Trayvon. That "witness" did not see anything that happened before the gunshot. This one did: Show nested quote +Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John. John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot. "And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point." http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/seminole_news/022712-man-shot-and-killed-in-neighborhood-altercation As you can see Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman giving him a savage beating, he got shot and falls to the ground, and Zimmerman then gets up. What your favoured "witness" saw after the shooting is completely consistent with Zimmerman's story and the eyewitness who saw Zimmerman being beaten. You're way off base. Numerous witnesses have stated that the voice they heard crying for help was clearly that of a boy and not a man, while the only witness to testify otherwise was the one you've repeatedly referenced. Furthermore, several witnesses who were interviewed by police said that the police pressured them to change their story to say that Zimmerman was the one crying for help. Your assertion that Trayvon Martin being a football player makes it more likely that he would win a fight against Zimmerman is absurd; look at the actual facts of their builds. Zimmerman outweighed Martin by a significant amount, and at 28 years old, his body was significantly more developed than the 17 year old Martin. Your assertion that Martin picked the fight because if he had chosen to run he would've gotten away, is also nonsense. Zimmerman (A) had been following Martin from a car, and (B) Martin had no reason to run, he was walking in a gated community where his father's girlfriend lived. Furthermore, very often, African-American parents tell their children not to run in suspicious circumstances, because it is always treated as a sign of guilt. Martin, in not fleeing Zimmerman, may have been trying to address the situation with words. Moreover, your assertion that Martin picked the fight, in general is the most gaping whole in your entire argument. Zimmerman stepped out of his car to pursue Martin. This is not in dispute. In stepping out of his car and engaging in pursuit, something which he was explicitly warned to not do, Zimmerman was the aggressor in this situation. He was armed with both a gun and a car, he had all the power. If the two actually did fight, you could make the most compelling argument that Martin had a right to self-defense, after all, he had just been stalked by a man he did not know, who then came out of his car and pursued him. That seems to be a significantly more compelling rational for self-defense than the story of man who chased after a boy carrying only a bag of skittles and an ice tea saying he needed to shoot the kid when there was a confrontation. Florida law does not protect you if you initiate the confrontation, and most state laws, including Florida's (although Florida gives you the benefit of the doubt, which is new) explain that the use of force in retaliation must be proportional. You cannot use deadly force unless you have reason to fear for your life, limbs, or vital organs (like your eyes). A property owner chasing a thief cannot use deadly force if the thief is running away. A man getting his ass kicked in a bar cannot use deadly force unless he has reason to believe that he's not just getting his ass kicked, but there is the potential that he may die. You have made eighty five posts in this topic arguing an extremely narrow and indefensible view based on your absolute certitude of the correctness of a single eyewitness, when there are multiple eyewitnesses who offer competing testimony and there is evidence of police coercion. Secondly, your version of events, even if it were valid, is still not defensible under Florida law, and common sense. I'd call you a troll, but your dedication here surpasses any reasonable troll. Thus, I have to conclude that you are either the president of the NRA, or the actual witness you consistently quote. The witness I have cited saw who was shouting for help. It was Zimmerman. The woman who claims she heard a "child crying" did not see who was shouting. She has no basis for claiming she knows who the shouts came from. Trayvon's father also told police it was not his son shouting on the recordings, but then later changed his story after the family decided to file a lawsuit. And we have already addressed this but someone following you or approaching you is not a crime. There is not any jurisdiction anywhere that allows you to pin someone on the ground and beat them in the head because they followed you.
Witnesses can be wrong. Especially when it's dark out, and there's confusion. Especially when there's pressure from police to produce a certain story. This has been proven in court case after court case. Witnesses can lie, misremember, or be persuaded to remember differently. Your entire argument is based on the argument of a single eyewitness. While this person may claim to be the best eyewitness, he was not the only one. The information by other eyewitnesses present a different picture, even if they never saw the crime committed. And your witness only saw the incident for a moment. He was inside when the shot was fired. Perhaps he saw Zimmerman and Martin rolling on the ground together and Zimmerman happened to be on the bottom. Perhaps as your witness ran back to his house, Zimmerman overpowered Martin, pushed him to the ground, and shot him execution style. You don't know. It could be anything. It's an incomplete eyewitness testimony. Moreover, the only independent source I can find that presents the story of that witness is the MyFOXOrlando report. Everything else links to that report. Your argument is based upon a single news story and a single eyewitness testimony of many.
I've not seen a source where Trayvon's father mis-identified the voice on the recordings, but even if I take your word for it, it's completely reasonable to take snap judgements taken just after having learned about the death of your son with a grain of salt.
Following someone in a car, and then approaching them may not be a crime. But it surely is enough to make someone afraid, especially a 17 year old boy who sees a 28 year old man following him. That could easily be justification for the person being followed to attempt to confront the person, especially if they feel that running is dangerous. Remember who shot who here.
I can't bring these points up enough.
- Martin posed absolutely no lethal threat to Zimmerman. Even if he was besting Zimmerman in a fight, that is no justification for lethal force. Only the threat of imminent death, or the loss of a limb or an eye justifies lethal force. That doesn't apply here. It simply doesn't. There was nothing Martin could've done, save breaking his bottle of ice tea and using it as a shiv that would've posed a serious threat to Zimmerman.
- You're arguing your entire case based on the testimony of a single witness, quoted in a single local TV article. The only other piece of testimony that corroborates this unidentified witness was Zimmerman himself. This may be enough evidence for reasonable doubt. But that is for a court to decide. By any standard, Zimmerman should be arrested.
On March 24 2012 05:41 cz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:41 CaptainFwiffo wrote:On March 24 2012 05:28 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 24 2012 05:24 CaptainFwiffo wrote:
Had a black man been the shooter, he would already be in jail. If the victim was not a young black male, the whole thing would have been handled differently by the cops. It has at least that much to do with race, even if Zimmerman is not racist. Is this a joke? Do you actually believe this? Do you actually live in this country? It is conjecture.
It's a highly reasonable conjecture.
|
On March 24 2012 05:44 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:27 Zaqwe wrote:On March 24 2012 05:17 tree.hugger wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2012 04:53 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 04:48 awesomoecalypse wrote:On March 24 2012 04:42 Zaqwe wrote:On March 24 2012 04:32 awesomoecalypse wrote:When they neglect to mention that the shot was fired while Zimmerman was on the ground on his back screaming for help with Trayvon punching him in the head, how can it not be an exaggeration? You yourself have just exaggerated the story in the same way.
Anyone who tries to tell this story and just conveniently leaves out the part where Zimmerman is being pummeled and in danger of serious brain injuries or death is being dishonest. Nobody but Zimmerman has corroborated this, and in fact, several pieces of evidence outright contradict it. In particular the fact that Trayvon was on the phone with his girlfriend until just prior to the incident, and was evidently both afraid and attempting to get away. The idea that he would then suddenly hang up the phone, turn around and head back to attack Zimmerman--and then somehow overpower Zimmerman despite the fact that Zimmerman had just been stalking him and outweighed him by 100 lbs--is farcicle. edit: also no evidence supports that the shot was fired from that position, AND there are witnesses who said that zimmerman was straddling the kid right after the gunshot. now unless he fired the gun pushed the kid off him and then straddled him, there is no way that is true. This. Zimmerman's story has a million holes. The only eyewitness to the beating has corroborated Zimmerman's account of events. There aren't any holes in his story. Zimmerman was in danger of being seriously injured or killed by the beating. This is a clear cut case of self defense. Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John. John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot. "And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point." http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/seminole_news/022712-man-shot-and-killed-in-neighborhood-altercation This is bullshit. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/anderson-cooper-interviews-witnesses-to-trayvon-martin-shooting/
“So you heard some sort of whining, some sort of commotion outside?” Cooper asked.
“We were in the kitchen, with the window open and the blinds pulled. So we had complete view from outside,” Cutcher explained.
Cooper asked her what was the first thing she saw.
“By that time, you hear like a shot — like some other noise,” Lamilla described.
“You heard the gunshot?” Cooper interjected.
“Yeah, I run away from my backyard and when I just get into the point of my — like my screen, it stopped me, I look at the person on his knees on top of a body,” Lamilla elaborated.
“So you saw Mr. Zimmerman on top of Trayvon Martin?” Cooper questioned.
“Trayvon, exactly,” Lamilla said.
“When you say on top of, how so?” the CNN anchor pressed.
“Straddling him,” Cutcher replied.
“His legs were straddling him?” Cooper followed up.
Zimmerman was straddling Trayvon. That "witness" did not see anything that happened before the gunshot. This one did: Show nested quote +Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John. John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot. "And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point." http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/seminole_news/022712-man-shot-and-killed-in-neighborhood-altercation As you can see Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman giving him a savage beating, he got shot and falls to the ground, and Zimmerman then gets up. What your favoured "witness" saw after the shooting is completely consistent with Zimmerman's story and the eyewitness who saw Zimmerman being beaten. You're way off base. Numerous witnesses have stated that the voice they heard crying for help was clearly that of a boy and not a man, while the only witness to testify otherwise was the one you've repeatedly referenced. Furthermore, several witnesses who were interviewed by police said that the police pressured them to change their story to say that Zimmerman was the one crying for help. Your assertion that Trayvon Martin being a football player makes it more likely that he would win a fight against Zimmerman is absurd; look at the actual facts of their builds. Zimmerman outweighed Martin by a significant amount, and at 28 years old, his body was significantly more developed than the 17 year old Martin. Your assertion that Martin picked the fight because if he had chosen to run he would've gotten away, is also nonsense. Zimmerman (A) had been following Martin from a car, and (B) Martin had no reason to run, he was walking in a gated community where his father's girlfriend lived. Furthermore, very often, African-American parents tell their children not to run in suspicious circumstances, because it is always treated as a sign of guilt. Martin, in not fleeing Zimmerman, may have been trying to address the situation with words. Moreover, your assertion that Martin picked the fight, in general is the most gaping whole in your entire argument. Zimmerman stepped out of his car to pursue Martin. This is not in dispute. In stepping out of his car and engaging in pursuit, something which he was explicitly warned to not do, Zimmerman was the aggressor in this situation. He was armed with both a gun and a car, he had all the power. If the two actually did fight, you could make the most compelling argument that Martin had a right to self-defense, after all, he had just been stalked by a man he did not know, who then came out of his car and pursued him. That seems to be a significantly more compelling rational for self-defense than the story of man who chased after a boy carrying only a bag of skittles and an ice tea saying he needed to shoot the kid when there was a confrontation. Florida law does not protect you if you initiate the confrontation, and most state laws, including Florida's (although Florida gives you the benefit of the doubt, which is new) explain that the use of force in retaliation must be proportional. You cannot use deadly force unless you have reason to fear for your life, limbs, or vital organs (like your eyes). A property owner chasing a thief cannot use deadly force if the thief is running away. A man getting his ass kicked in a bar cannot use deadly force unless he has reason to believe that he's not just getting his ass kicked, but there is the potential that he may die. You have made eighty five posts in this topic arguing an extremely narrow and indefensible view based on your absolute certitude of the correctness of a single eyewitness, when there are multiple eyewitnesses who offer competing testimony and there is evidence of police coercion. Secondly, your version of events, even if it were valid, is still not defensible under Florida law, and common sense. I'd call you a troll, but your dedication here surpasses any reasonable troll. Thus, I have to conclude that you are either the president of the NRA, or the actual witness you consistently quote. The witness I have cited saw who was shouting for help. It was Zimmerman. The woman who claims she heard a "child crying" did not see who was shouting. She has no basis for claiming she knows who the shouts came from. Trayvon's father also told police it was not his son shouting on the recordings, but then later changed his story after the family decided to file a lawsuit. And we have already addressed this but someone following you or approaching you is not a crime. There is not any jurisdiction anywhere that allows you to pin someone on the ground and beat them in the head because they followed you. Witnesses can be wrong. Especially when it's dark out, and there's confusion. Especially when there's pressure from police to produce a certain story. This has been proven in court case after court case. Witnesses can lie, misremember, or be persuaded to remember differently. Your entire argument is based on the argument of a single eyewitness. While this person may claim to be the best eyewitness, he was not the only one. The information by other eyewitnesses present a different picture, even if they never saw the crime committed. And your witness only saw the incident for a moment. He was inside when the shot was fired. Perhaps he saw Zimmerman and Martin rolling on the ground together and Zimmerman happened to be on the bottom. Perhaps as your witness ran back to his house, Zimmerman overpowered Martin, pushed him to the ground, and shot him execution style. You don't know. It could be anything. It's an incomplete eyewitness testimony. Moreover, the only independent source I can find that presents the story of that witness is the MyFOXOrlando report. Everything else links to that report. Your argument is based upon a single news story and a single eyewitness testimony of many. I've not seen a source where Trayvon's father mis-identified the voice on the recordings, but even if I take your word for it, it's completely reasonable to take snap judgements taken just after having learned about the death of your son with a grain of salt. Following someone in a car, and then approaching them may not be a crime. But it surely is enough to make someone afraid, especially a 17 year old boy who sees a 28 year old man following him. That could easily be justification for the person being followed to attempt to confront the person, especially if they feel that running is dangerous. Remember who shot who here. I can't bring these points up enough. - Martin posed absolutely no lethal threat to Zimmerman. Even if he was besting Zimmerman in a fight, that is no justification for lethal force. Only the threat of imminent death, or the loss of a limb or an eye justifies lethal force. That doesn't apply here. It simply doesn't. There was nothing Martin could've done, save breaking his bottle of ice tea and using it as a shiv that would've posed a serious threat to Zimmerman. - You're arguing your entire case based on the testimony of a single witness, quoted in a single local TV article. The only other piece of testimony that corroborates this unidentified witness was Zimmerman himself. This may be enough evidence for reasonable doubt. But that is for a court to decide. By any standard, Zimmerman should be arrested. Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:41 cz wrote:On March 24 2012 05:41 CaptainFwiffo wrote:On March 24 2012 05:28 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 24 2012 05:24 CaptainFwiffo wrote:
Had a black man been the shooter, he would already be in jail. If the victim was not a young black male, the whole thing would have been handled differently by the cops. It has at least that much to do with race, even if Zimmerman is not racist. Is this a joke? Do you actually believe this? Do you actually live in this country? It is conjecture. It's a highly reasonable conjecture.
You criticize him for using a witness but just throw out your own conjecture on your own. Yes, one witness is not necessarily reliable, but that doesn't mean what they saw didn't happen or is to be discounted.
And conjecture is conjecture. You're making an assumption that may or may not be true.
|
Yes, one witness is not necessarily reliable, but that doesn't mean what they saw didn't happen or is to be discounted.
Nor should it be used as the entire justification for taking a shooter's claim of self defence as absolute truth, and not bothering to arrest him or bring this to trial.
|
From what I can summarize from the witnesses, there are three people in total who witnessed it:
1) A man who says he saw Zimmerman on the ground being beaten by Zimmerman. Claims that Zimmerman was crying for help. This happened before the shooting (just a little bit).
2) Two roommates. They didn't see it but heard someone crying out, and the crying stopped after the gunshot. They say it was high-pitched crying. They saw Zimmerman standing over Martin's body afterwards.
The rest is conjecture from the witnesses, but that's apparently what they can say on the witness stand.
|
On March 24 2012 05:49 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +Yes, one witness is not necessarily reliable, but that doesn't mean what they saw didn't happen or is to be discounted.
Nor should it be used as the entire justification for taking a shooter's claim of self defence as absolute truth, and not bothering to arrest him or bring this to trial.
Not saying it shouldn't.
|
On March 24 2012 05:44 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:27 Zaqwe wrote:On March 24 2012 05:17 tree.hugger wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2012 04:53 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 04:48 awesomoecalypse wrote:On March 24 2012 04:42 Zaqwe wrote:On March 24 2012 04:32 awesomoecalypse wrote:When they neglect to mention that the shot was fired while Zimmerman was on the ground on his back screaming for help with Trayvon punching him in the head, how can it not be an exaggeration? You yourself have just exaggerated the story in the same way.
Anyone who tries to tell this story and just conveniently leaves out the part where Zimmerman is being pummeled and in danger of serious brain injuries or death is being dishonest. Nobody but Zimmerman has corroborated this, and in fact, several pieces of evidence outright contradict it. In particular the fact that Trayvon was on the phone with his girlfriend until just prior to the incident, and was evidently both afraid and attempting to get away. The idea that he would then suddenly hang up the phone, turn around and head back to attack Zimmerman--and then somehow overpower Zimmerman despite the fact that Zimmerman had just been stalking him and outweighed him by 100 lbs--is farcicle. edit: also no evidence supports that the shot was fired from that position, AND there are witnesses who said that zimmerman was straddling the kid right after the gunshot. now unless he fired the gun pushed the kid off him and then straddled him, there is no way that is true. This. Zimmerman's story has a million holes. The only eyewitness to the beating has corroborated Zimmerman's account of events. There aren't any holes in his story. Zimmerman was in danger of being seriously injured or killed by the beating. This is a clear cut case of self defense. Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John. John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot. "And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point." http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/seminole_news/022712-man-shot-and-killed-in-neighborhood-altercation This is bullshit. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/anderson-cooper-interviews-witnesses-to-trayvon-martin-shooting/
“So you heard some sort of whining, some sort of commotion outside?” Cooper asked.
“We were in the kitchen, with the window open and the blinds pulled. So we had complete view from outside,” Cutcher explained.
Cooper asked her what was the first thing she saw.
“By that time, you hear like a shot — like some other noise,” Lamilla described.
“You heard the gunshot?” Cooper interjected.
“Yeah, I run away from my backyard and when I just get into the point of my — like my screen, it stopped me, I look at the person on his knees on top of a body,” Lamilla elaborated.
“So you saw Mr. Zimmerman on top of Trayvon Martin?” Cooper questioned.
“Trayvon, exactly,” Lamilla said.
“When you say on top of, how so?” the CNN anchor pressed.
“Straddling him,” Cutcher replied.
“His legs were straddling him?” Cooper followed up.
Zimmerman was straddling Trayvon. That "witness" did not see anything that happened before the gunshot. This one did: Show nested quote +Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John. John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot. "And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point." http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/seminole_news/022712-man-shot-and-killed-in-neighborhood-altercation As you can see Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman giving him a savage beating, he got shot and falls to the ground, and Zimmerman then gets up. What your favoured "witness" saw after the shooting is completely consistent with Zimmerman's story and the eyewitness who saw Zimmerman being beaten. You're way off base. Numerous witnesses have stated that the voice they heard crying for help was clearly that of a boy and not a man, while the only witness to testify otherwise was the one you've repeatedly referenced. Furthermore, several witnesses who were interviewed by police said that the police pressured them to change their story to say that Zimmerman was the one crying for help. Your assertion that Trayvon Martin being a football player makes it more likely that he would win a fight against Zimmerman is absurd; look at the actual facts of their builds. Zimmerman outweighed Martin by a significant amount, and at 28 years old, his body was significantly more developed than the 17 year old Martin. Your assertion that Martin picked the fight because if he had chosen to run he would've gotten away, is also nonsense. Zimmerman (A) had been following Martin from a car, and (B) Martin had no reason to run, he was walking in a gated community where his father's girlfriend lived. Furthermore, very often, African-American parents tell their children not to run in suspicious circumstances, because it is always treated as a sign of guilt. Martin, in not fleeing Zimmerman, may have been trying to address the situation with words. Moreover, your assertion that Martin picked the fight, in general is the most gaping whole in your entire argument. Zimmerman stepped out of his car to pursue Martin. This is not in dispute. In stepping out of his car and engaging in pursuit, something which he was explicitly warned to not do, Zimmerman was the aggressor in this situation. He was armed with both a gun and a car, he had all the power. If the two actually did fight, you could make the most compelling argument that Martin had a right to self-defense, after all, he had just been stalked by a man he did not know, who then came out of his car and pursued him. That seems to be a significantly more compelling rational for self-defense than the story of man who chased after a boy carrying only a bag of skittles and an ice tea saying he needed to shoot the kid when there was a confrontation. Florida law does not protect you if you initiate the confrontation, and most state laws, including Florida's (although Florida gives you the benefit of the doubt, which is new) explain that the use of force in retaliation must be proportional. You cannot use deadly force unless you have reason to fear for your life, limbs, or vital organs (like your eyes). A property owner chasing a thief cannot use deadly force if the thief is running away. A man getting his ass kicked in a bar cannot use deadly force unless he has reason to believe that he's not just getting his ass kicked, but there is the potential that he may die. You have made eighty five posts in this topic arguing an extremely narrow and indefensible view based on your absolute certitude of the correctness of a single eyewitness, when there are multiple eyewitnesses who offer competing testimony and there is evidence of police coercion. Secondly, your version of events, even if it were valid, is still not defensible under Florida law, and common sense. I'd call you a troll, but your dedication here surpasses any reasonable troll. Thus, I have to conclude that you are either the president of the NRA, or the actual witness you consistently quote. The witness I have cited saw who was shouting for help. It was Zimmerman. The woman who claims she heard a "child crying" did not see who was shouting. She has no basis for claiming she knows who the shouts came from. Trayvon's father also told police it was not his son shouting on the recordings, but then later changed his story after the family decided to file a lawsuit. And we have already addressed this but someone following you or approaching you is not a crime. There is not any jurisdiction anywhere that allows you to pin someone on the ground and beat them in the head because they followed you. Witnesses can be wrong. Especially when it's dark out, and there's confusion. Especially when there's pressure from police to produce a certain story. This has been proven in court case after court case. Witnesses can lie, misremember, or be persuaded to remember differently. Your entire argument is based on the argument of a single eyewitness. While this person may claim to be the best eyewitness, he was not the only one. The information by other eyewitnesses present a different picture, even if they never saw the crime committed. And your witness only saw the incident for a moment. He was inside when the shot was fired. Perhaps he saw Zimmerman and Martin rolling on the ground together and Zimmerman happened to be on the bottom. Perhaps as your witness ran back to his house, Zimmerman overpowered Martin, pushed him to the ground, and shot him execution style. You don't know. It could be anything. It's an incomplete eyewitness testimony. Moreover, the only independent source I can find that presents the story of that witness is the MyFOXOrlando report. Everything else links to that report. Your argument is based upon a single news story and a single eyewitness testimony of many. I've not seen a source where Trayvon's father mis-identified the voice on the recordings, but even if I take your word for it, it's completely reasonable to take snap judgements taken just after having learned about the death of your son with a grain of salt. Following someone in a car, and then approaching them may not be a crime. But it surely is enough to make someone afraid, especially a 17 year old boy who sees a 28 year old man following him. That could easily be justification for the person being followed to attempt to confront the person, especially if they feel that running is dangerous. Remember who shot who here. I can't bring these points up enough. - Martin posed absolutely no lethal threat to Zimmerman. Even if he was besting Zimmerman in a fight, that is no justification for lethal force. Only the threat of imminent death, or the loss of a limb or an eye justifies lethal force. That doesn't apply here. It simply doesn't. There was nothing Martin could've done, save breaking his bottle of ice tea and using it as a shiv that would've posed a serious threat to Zimmerman. - You're arguing your entire case based on the testimony of a single witness, quoted in a single local TV article. The only other piece of testimony that corroborates this unidentified witness was Zimmerman himself. This may be enough evidence for reasonable doubt. But that is for a court to decide. By any standard, Zimmerman should be arrested. Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:41 cz wrote:On March 24 2012 05:41 CaptainFwiffo wrote:On March 24 2012 05:28 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 24 2012 05:24 CaptainFwiffo wrote:
Had a black man been the shooter, he would already be in jail. If the victim was not a young black male, the whole thing would have been handled differently by the cops. It has at least that much to do with race, even if Zimmerman is not racist. Is this a joke? Do you actually believe this? Do you actually live in this country? It is conjecture. It's a highly reasonable conjecture.
You don't think someone being on top of you repeatedly punching you in the head is serious? I don't know how you grew up, but let me tell you you can get all sorts of life long injuries from being repeatedly being beaten in the head, and yes you can likely die. Let me tell you I and any reasonable person would use lethal force if I was being pinned down and beaten in the head. If I had a knife, I would stab him. If I had a gun, I would shoot him etc... If someone has you pinned and is beating you in the head and has no intention of stopping, you can very well die and should use all the force you have at your disposal.
|
I honestly didn't think the point would be controversial, given the high profile and disturbingly frequent incidents of racial profiling by police, including a number that have resulted in the deaths. If anything, I expected disagreement to be more along the lines of "racial profiling is OK" rather than "racial profiling doesn't happen."
|
"- Martin posed absolutely no lethal threat to Zimmerman. Even if he was besting Zimmerman in a fight, that is no justification for lethal force. Only the threat of imminent death, or the loss of a limb or an eye justifies lethal force. That doesn't apply here. It simply doesn't. There was nothing Martin could've done, save breaking his bottle of ice tea and using it as a shiv that would've posed a serious threat to Zimmerman. "
So if the story of being jumped from behind while returning to his truck holds true, and he was crying out for help while getting beaten, how does this point hold up????
|
On March 24 2012 05:50 cz wrote:
From what I can summarize from the witnesses, there are three people in total who witnessed it:
1) A man who says he saw Zimmerman on the ground being beaten by Zimmerman. Claims that Zimmerman was crying for help. This happened before the shooting (just a little bit).
2) Two roommates. They didn't see it but heard someone crying out, and the crying stopped after the gunshot. They say it was high-pitched crying.
The rest is conjecture from the witnesses, but that's apparently what they can say on the witness stand.
there is another witness who saw zimmerman straddling martin right after the gunshot. but besides that yeah thats the summary. oh yeah the person who saw zimmerman on top was the person who lived in the house who martin was shot in front of.
|
Not saying it shouldn't.
But thats exactly what happened, which is what has people so upset. If the cops had arrested him, this had gone to trial, and a jury of his peers ultimately sided with Zimmerman, that would be one thing, but thats not what happened. The actuality of how it was handled is extremely fucked up.
|
On March 24 2012 05:52 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:50 cz wrote:
From what I can summarize from the witnesses, there are three people in total who witnessed it:
1) A man who says he saw Zimmerman on the ground being beaten by Zimmerman. Claims that Zimmerman was crying for help. This happened before the shooting (just a little bit).
2) Two roommates. They didn't see it but heard someone crying out, and the crying stopped after the gunshot. They say it was high-pitched crying.
The rest is conjecture from the witnesses, but that's apparently what they can say on the witness stand. there is another witness who saw zimmerman straddling martin right after the gunshot. but besides that yeah thats the summary. oh yeah the person who saw zimmerman on top was the person who lived in the house who martin was shot in front of.
Source for straddling witness?
|
On March 24 2012 05:44 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:27 Zaqwe wrote:On March 24 2012 05:17 tree.hugger wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 24 2012 04:53 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 04:48 awesomoecalypse wrote:On March 24 2012 04:42 Zaqwe wrote:On March 24 2012 04:32 awesomoecalypse wrote:When they neglect to mention that the shot was fired while Zimmerman was on the ground on his back screaming for help with Trayvon punching him in the head, how can it not be an exaggeration? You yourself have just exaggerated the story in the same way.
Anyone who tries to tell this story and just conveniently leaves out the part where Zimmerman is being pummeled and in danger of serious brain injuries or death is being dishonest. Nobody but Zimmerman has corroborated this, and in fact, several pieces of evidence outright contradict it. In particular the fact that Trayvon was on the phone with his girlfriend until just prior to the incident, and was evidently both afraid and attempting to get away. The idea that he would then suddenly hang up the phone, turn around and head back to attack Zimmerman--and then somehow overpower Zimmerman despite the fact that Zimmerman had just been stalking him and outweighed him by 100 lbs--is farcicle. edit: also no evidence supports that the shot was fired from that position, AND there are witnesses who said that zimmerman was straddling the kid right after the gunshot. now unless he fired the gun pushed the kid off him and then straddled him, there is no way that is true. This. Zimmerman's story has a million holes. The only eyewitness to the beating has corroborated Zimmerman's account of events. There aren't any holes in his story. Zimmerman was in danger of being seriously injured or killed by the beating. This is a clear cut case of self defense. Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John. John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot. "And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point." http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/seminole_news/022712-man-shot-and-killed-in-neighborhood-altercation This is bullshit. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/anderson-cooper-interviews-witnesses-to-trayvon-martin-shooting/
“So you heard some sort of whining, some sort of commotion outside?” Cooper asked.
“We were in the kitchen, with the window open and the blinds pulled. So we had complete view from outside,” Cutcher explained.
Cooper asked her what was the first thing she saw.
“By that time, you hear like a shot — like some other noise,” Lamilla described.
“You heard the gunshot?” Cooper interjected.
“Yeah, I run away from my backyard and when I just get into the point of my — like my screen, it stopped me, I look at the person on his knees on top of a body,” Lamilla elaborated.
“So you saw Mr. Zimmerman on top of Trayvon Martin?” Cooper questioned.
“Trayvon, exactly,” Lamilla said.
“When you say on top of, how so?” the CNN anchor pressed.
“Straddling him,” Cutcher replied.
“His legs were straddling him?” Cooper followed up.
Zimmerman was straddling Trayvon. That "witness" did not see anything that happened before the gunshot. This one did: Show nested quote +Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John. John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot. "And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point." http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/seminole_news/022712-man-shot-and-killed-in-neighborhood-altercation As you can see Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman giving him a savage beating, he got shot and falls to the ground, and Zimmerman then gets up. What your favoured "witness" saw after the shooting is completely consistent with Zimmerman's story and the eyewitness who saw Zimmerman being beaten. You're way off base. Numerous witnesses have stated that the voice they heard crying for help was clearly that of a boy and not a man, while the only witness to testify otherwise was the one you've repeatedly referenced. Furthermore, several witnesses who were interviewed by police said that the police pressured them to change their story to say that Zimmerman was the one crying for help. Your assertion that Trayvon Martin being a football player makes it more likely that he would win a fight against Zimmerman is absurd; look at the actual facts of their builds. Zimmerman outweighed Martin by a significant amount, and at 28 years old, his body was significantly more developed than the 17 year old Martin. Your assertion that Martin picked the fight because if he had chosen to run he would've gotten away, is also nonsense. Zimmerman (A) had been following Martin from a car, and (B) Martin had no reason to run, he was walking in a gated community where his father's girlfriend lived. Furthermore, very often, African-American parents tell their children not to run in suspicious circumstances, because it is always treated as a sign of guilt. Martin, in not fleeing Zimmerman, may have been trying to address the situation with words. Moreover, your assertion that Martin picked the fight, in general is the most gaping whole in your entire argument. Zimmerman stepped out of his car to pursue Martin. This is not in dispute. In stepping out of his car and engaging in pursuit, something which he was explicitly warned to not do, Zimmerman was the aggressor in this situation. He was armed with both a gun and a car, he had all the power. If the two actually did fight, you could make the most compelling argument that Martin had a right to self-defense, after all, he had just been stalked by a man he did not know, who then came out of his car and pursued him. That seems to be a significantly more compelling rational for self-defense than the story of man who chased after a boy carrying only a bag of skittles and an ice tea saying he needed to shoot the kid when there was a confrontation. Florida law does not protect you if you initiate the confrontation, and most state laws, including Florida's (although Florida gives you the benefit of the doubt, which is new) explain that the use of force in retaliation must be proportional. You cannot use deadly force unless you have reason to fear for your life, limbs, or vital organs (like your eyes). A property owner chasing a thief cannot use deadly force if the thief is running away. A man getting his ass kicked in a bar cannot use deadly force unless he has reason to believe that he's not just getting his ass kicked, but there is the potential that he may die. You have made eighty five posts in this topic arguing an extremely narrow and indefensible view based on your absolute certitude of the correctness of a single eyewitness, when there are multiple eyewitnesses who offer competing testimony and there is evidence of police coercion. Secondly, your version of events, even if it were valid, is still not defensible under Florida law, and common sense. I'd call you a troll, but your dedication here surpasses any reasonable troll. Thus, I have to conclude that you are either the president of the NRA, or the actual witness you consistently quote. The witness I have cited saw who was shouting for help. It was Zimmerman. The woman who claims she heard a "child crying" did not see who was shouting. She has no basis for claiming she knows who the shouts came from. Trayvon's father also told police it was not his son shouting on the recordings, but then later changed his story after the family decided to file a lawsuit. And we have already addressed this but someone following you or approaching you is not a crime. There is not any jurisdiction anywhere that allows you to pin someone on the ground and beat them in the head because they followed you. Witnesses can be wrong. Especially when it's dark out, and there's confusion. Especially when there's pressure from police to produce a certain story. This has been proven in court case after court case. Witnesses can lie, misremember, or be persuaded to remember differently. Your entire argument is based on the argument of a single eyewitness. While this person may claim to be the best eyewitness, he was not the only one. The information by other eyewitnesses present a different picture, even if they never saw the crime committed. And your witness only saw the incident for a moment. He was inside when the shot was fired. Perhaps he saw Zimmerman and Martin rolling on the ground together and Zimmerman happened to be on the bottom. Perhaps as your witness ran back to his house, Zimmerman overpowered Martin, pushed him to the ground, and shot him execution style. You don't know. It could be anything. It's an incomplete eyewitness testimony. Moreover, the only independent source I can find that presents the story of that witness is the MyFOXOrlando report. Everything else links to that report. Your argument is based upon a single news story and a single eyewitness testimony of many. I've not seen a source where Trayvon's father mis-identified the voice on the recordings, but even if I take your word for it, it's completely reasonable to take snap judgements taken just after having learned about the death of your son with a grain of salt. Following someone in a car, and then approaching them may not be a crime. But it surely is enough to make someone afraid, especially a 17 year old boy who sees a 28 year old man following him. That could easily be justification for the person being followed to attempt to confront the person, especially if they feel that running is dangerous. Remember who shot who here. I can't bring these points up enough. - Martin posed absolutely no lethal threat to Zimmerman. Even if he was besting Zimmerman in a fight, that is no justification for lethal force. Only the threat of imminent death, or the loss of a limb or an eye justifies lethal force. That doesn't apply here. It simply doesn't. There was nothing Martin could've done, save breaking his bottle of ice tea and using it as a shiv that would've posed a serious threat to Zimmerman. - You're arguing your entire case based on the testimony of a single witness, quoted in a single local TV article. The only other piece of testimony that corroborates this unidentified witness was Zimmerman himself. This may be enough evidence for reasonable doubt. But that is for a court to decide. By any standard, Zimmerman should be arrested. Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:41 cz wrote:On March 24 2012 05:41 CaptainFwiffo wrote:On March 24 2012 05:28 Lockitupv2 wrote:On March 24 2012 05:24 CaptainFwiffo wrote:
Had a black man been the shooter, he would already be in jail. If the victim was not a young black male, the whole thing would have been handled differently by the cops. It has at least that much to do with race, even if Zimmerman is not racist. Is this a joke? Do you actually believe this? Do you actually live in this country? It is conjecture. It's a highly reasonable conjecture.
i think your analyses have been pretty reasonable, but i am going to have to disagree with the point that the kid posed "absolutely no lethal threat to Zimmerman." we don't know what actually happened, but let me pose a theory to you:
what if zimmerman approached the kid and asked him why he was in the neighborhood. he is not showing the gun (which is concealed) or threatening the kid in any way other than approaching and questioning him. the kid says something dismissive (fuck off, leave me alone, none of your business, etc.). then zimmerman says something to escalate the word war (im going to call the police on you, punk kid, get out of my neighborhood). maybe zimmerman tries to grab the kid, maybe zimmerman pushes the kid. then it escalates. kid eventually ends up on top of zimmerman and is punching him in the face, maybe he is bashing his head against the sidewalk. at that point zimmerman thinks "fuck, this kid is going to kill me" and pulls out the concealed gun and shoots the kid.
arguably, that could be self defense, maybe not. however, when people start making absolute statements like "absolutely no lethal threat," but dont know what actually happened and dont wait to hear zimmerman's side of the story then i start to get worried.
just to repeat, i made up this story, because i dont know what happened and the witness accounts are all over the place. we dont know the full story, so we shouldnt assume we do.
|
On March 24 2012 05:53 awesomoecalypse wrote:But thats exactly what happened, which is what has people so upset. If the cops had arrested him, this had gone to trial, and a jury of his peers ultimately sided with Zimmerman, that would be one thing, but thats not what happened. The actuality of how it was handled is extremely fucked up.
I still agree with you... I'm not bringing up the witnesses to say that this shouldn't go to trial and be sorted out properly, I'm bringing it up because apparently some people believe that Martin was unequivically murdered. We don't know what happened, and the witnesses are, at best in Martin's case, conflicting.
|
Study: "Association between handgun purchase and mortality from firearm injury"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1730916/pdf/v009p00048.pdf
"
Objective: To determine the association between mortality from violent or firearm related injury and
previous handgun purchase.
Methods: Case-control study of 213 466 Californians ages 21 and older who died in 1998; cases
were the 4728 violent or firearm related injury deaths, with subsets by specific cause and means of
death, and controls were the 208 738 non-injury deaths. The exposure of interest was the purchase of
a handgun during 1996–98. The main outcome measure was the odds ratio for handgun purchase,
adjusted for age, sex, race, education, and marital status.
Results: Handgun purchase was more common among persons dying from suicide (odds ratio (OR)
6.8; 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.7 to 8.1) or homicide (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.7), and particu-
larly among those dying from gun suicide (OR 12.5; 95% CI 10.4 to 15.0) or gun homicide (OR 3.3;
95% CI 2.1 to 5.3), than among controls. No such differences were seen for non-gun suicide or homi-
cide. Among women, those dying from gun suicide were much more likely than controls to have pur-
chased a handgun (OR 109.8; 95% CI 61.6 to 195.7). Handgun purchasers accounted for less than
1% of the study population but 2.4% of gun homicides, 14.2% of gun suicides, and 16.7% of uninten-
tional gun deaths. Gun suicide made up 18.9% of deaths among purchasers but only 0.6% of deaths
among non-purchasers.
Conclusion: Among adults who died in California in 1998, those dying from violence were more
likely than those dying from non-injury causes to have purchased a handgun.
"
|
On March 24 2012 05:52 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2012 05:50 cz wrote:
From what I can summarize from the witnesses, there are three people in total who witnessed it:
1) A man who says he saw Zimmerman on the ground being beaten by Zimmerman. Claims that Zimmerman was crying for help. This happened before the shooting (just a little bit).
2) Two roommates. They didn't see it but heard someone crying out, and the crying stopped after the gunshot. They say it was high-pitched crying.
The rest is conjecture from the witnesses, but that's apparently what they can say on the witness stand. there is another witness who saw zimmerman straddling martin right after the gunshot. but besides that yeah thats the summary. oh yeah the person who saw zimmerman on top was the person who lived in the house who martin was shot in front of.
didnt she also say that it looked like he was trying to stop the bleeding or something to that effect? it could be that the kid was on top of him, he shot the kid and knocked him off and then he got on top to try to stop the bleeding because he realized he fucked up. i am just theorizing of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
