On May 31 2013 05:55 GwSC wrote: Oh look, it's someone presenting the "This is what happened, if you think otherwise you're a racist" argument, yet again.
I am kind of interested in your viewpoint. Why do you think Martin would attack Zimmerman?
I have no idea. I do not follow all this as closely as some people do. I just would prefer that if people want to make the argument "This is what happened and you're a racist if you think otherwise", they would not try to beat around the bush and instead just say it outright.
Some people think that when a person with a gun follows you for more than a block and ends up shooting you that he is more likely to have instigated a fight.
Others think a kid walking home would instigate a fight.
Of course that doesn't make sense since why would a kid that is walking home randomly start a fight? Oh right, there is one reason why you would think it would make sense why a black kid would randomly start a fight.
If you have other reasons why a kid would randomly start fights on his way home--please enlighten us.
Why does him being black have anything to do with it? Are you racist? How about it's completely plausible that a person who looked like they were doing something wrong (hint: it's not being black) was questioned by someone who was looking out his neighborhood? He was aware of reported break-ins and saw someone he didn't recognize walking behind houses.
On May 30 2013 22:21 Lt_Stork wrote: Let's try to go through the event leading up to the gunshot. The 911 dispatcher is asking if he's following Trayvon and telling him he doesn't need to do that at 7.12 pm.
- He doesn't follow and stays on the phone until 7.13:41 pm. Call ends. - During this time Trayvon is on the phone with his girlfriend until 7.16 pm. - The first 911 call about the fight is at 7:16pm, reporting a fight and someone yelling help - The gunshot is at 7:16:55pm.
Zimmermans talks with police normally toward the end. Zimmerman ran after Trayvon, but stopped when he lost him. He wasn't threatened and Trayvon was not attacking him. - According to the girlfriend, they were still talking and Trayvon had a headset on when the final confrontation happened, between 7.15pm and 7.15:30pm
- The headset fell to the ground and call went dead at 7.16pm. Girlfriend heard Trayvon: “Why are you following me?” Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”
The fight lasted at the most a minute and a half before Trayvon got shot (source). In the 911 call someone is heard screaming help for over a minute, ending with the gunshot. Zimmerman claims it was him, Trayvons family claims it was Trayvon. The call is in the video bellow:
A minute and a half is what is up for debate. My personal thoughts: A person was yelling help for one minute. In that small community someone was bound to come outside and help him if it was Zimmerman. Several people called 911 minutes after the gunshot and 2 minutes later someone takes a picture of Zimmermans backhead.
The community had a history of burglaries, they knew Zimmerman, were probably friends, and appointed him neighborhood watch. Surely they would have recognized his voice screaming for help and would come out to help him.
The conclusion I draw is that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. He was in his community and if he shouted for help he could count on people to come out and help him. To shoot a 17 y/o kid after fighting for a minute?
You are drawing conclusions based on some really big assumptions: 1. That people would have been able to hear him screaming for help and they would have came to his aid 2. That he had a back up plan in case his life was in danger (people to count on to help him) 3. That it was Trayvon, not George Zimmerman, screaming for help 4. That a minute is not enough time to determine if your life is in danger
1 is wrong because a woman calls 911 for help and doesn't go outside and even says "I don't want to go out there" while on the phone. 2 is based on nothing. 3 Contradicts 1 and 2 and doesn't make any sense either because George Zimmerman was the one having his face and head smashed by Trayvons fist. The autopsy revealed that the only injuries Trayvon had were the gunshot wound in his chest, shot at intermediate range (1-18 inches), and one small abrasian on his left ring finger below the knuckle. Why would he be the one screaming if George Zimmerman was the one being punched? Why would he be screaming before he got shot when the only injury he sustained before that moment was the one on his fist? 4 is just false, especially if your head is bouncing between someones fist and the concrete, I'm sure many people would feel like their life was in danger if no one is coming to help them.
The "expert" analysis who "put his reputation" on the line said he was 95% certain that it was NOT George Zimmerman. Aside from the obvious of that not making any sense at all based on the context and the injuries both had, is one experts opinion that there is only 5% chance that it was Zimmerman screaming enough for reasonable doubt? Yes.
The screaming happened away from the road in a more quiet portion of the neighborhood. People would have heard them screaming. It's why someone called 911 without "going outside" because they did hear the screaming.
What we have is an armed man who had walked closer to the victim's house than he did his car--showing that he did follow the victim. The victim ends up dead after being followed by an armed man with a history of anger issues. The victim was walking towards his home, as can be seen on the map, and the shooter was walking away from his car, as can also be seen on the map.
A struggle happened wherein one or both the people called out for help--an argument is now in session about who it was that did.
People keep bringing up injuries as if it says anything; it should make sense that Travyon has less injuries than Zman, Zman because Travyon was the one unarmed. His life being threatened by an armed man, he charges at him has to use fists to deal damage to his attacker; in the end he lost the encounter. If they did speak then Travyon would be less than 21 feet away from Zman and hence had a chance to charge him before he got shot.
It's also possible that Travyon, after being only down the street from his house, randomly decides to attack some random person on the street for no reason. I guess, if you believe black people normally do that, you can see that as plausible.
What we do know is that a fight occurred. Both sides have evidence suggesting that the other person initiated it. In the end it's about what is more believable. That a black kid randomly attacks people he sees on the streets, or that an armed vigilante got trigger happy after following a stranger despite being told by authorities not to do that.
So you are making even more assumptions without proof and dismissing the injuries as irrelevant in determining who was screaming during the phone call.
A few assumptions 1. That he was told not to follow Trayvon. False. He said he was following him and the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to do that. That's not an order, and even if it was, he isn't obligated to "obey orders". 2. That Zimmerman threatened Trayvon with a gun before they started fighting. Plausible, but still just an assumption.
Aside from that your post is just race-baiting nonsense. You're more concerned about what sounds more believable to you than the facts.
If it's race baiting non-sense then why would a kid walking home randomly attack someone?
The facts is that we don't know who instigated it.
You believe that since Zman had injuries the victim must have instigated the attack, it's also possible that the victim was acting in self defense after perceiving the threat of a gun. Both lead to the same injuries and hence the injuries don't prove anything--only that a fight happened.
You then have to then ask "why" the fight happened. To some, it makes sense a black kid randomly attacks someone. To others, it makes sense that a vigilante got cocky. This is what is up for debate.
The only thing not up for debate is that Zman shot a kid who was walking home. The only thing not up for debate is that after being asked by the authorities not to follow the kid, he does so anyway. How do I know? Because if he went back to his car and drove home none of this would have happened. Instead he walked away from his car and ended down the block from the victim's home.
Does it make sense to me that a guy holding a gun who follows someone around ends up shooting someone--yes it does make sense to me. Does it make sense to me that a kid who is almost home would randomly start a fight for no reason? No, it doesn't. But that is what's up for debate.
The injuries never seemed all that relevant to me, they just confirm that there was a fight, and that Zimmerman was probably losing it. It says nothing about who initiated the fight. The injuries also say nothing about the circumstances under which the fight was initiated, could Zimmerman not have seemed so threatening to Martin that he reasonably believed that he was in danger from this man who had been following him, and that he decided to defend himself?
On May 31 2013 05:55 GwSC wrote: Oh look, it's someone presenting the "This is what happened, if you think otherwise you're a racist" argument, yet again.
I am kind of interested in your viewpoint. Why do you think Martin would attack Zimmerman?
I have no idea. I do not follow all this as closely as some people do. I just would prefer that if people want to make the argument "This is what happened and you're a racist if you think otherwise", they would not try to beat around the bush and instead just say it outright.
Some people think that when a person with a gun follows you for more than a block and ends up shooting you that he is more likely to have instigated a fight.
Others think a kid walking home would instigate a fight.
Of course that doesn't make sense since why would a kid that is walking home randomly start a fight? Oh right, there is one reason why you would think it would make sense why a black kid would randomly start a fight.
If you have other reasons why a kid would randomly start fights on his way home--please enlighten us.
Why does him being black have anything to do with it? Are you racist? How about it's completely plausible that a person who looked like they were doing something wrong (hint: it's not being black) was questioned by someone who was looking out his neighborhood? He was aware of reported break-ins and saw someone he didn't recognize walking behind houses.
Not my picture, the OP's picture. (You did read the OP right?)
And I asked you for a reason why it makes sense a kid would attack someone when he's almost home. Because I can't think of any. I don't think any sane person can think of any. The only type of person who I can see coming to that conclusion is someone who thinks it makes sense black kids randomly attack people.
However, if what you're saying is true, and an armed man starts harassing travyon--then it's really Zman who initiates the fight with his harassment. That I could also see.
This means it could be:
a) Cocky vigilante b) Zman harasses Travyon c) Travyon attacks someone for some reason
On May 30 2013 22:21 Lt_Stork wrote: Let's try to go through the event leading up to the gunshot. The 911 dispatcher is asking if he's following Trayvon and telling him he doesn't need to do that at 7.12 pm.
- He doesn't follow and stays on the phone until 7.13:41 pm. Call ends. - During this time Trayvon is on the phone with his girlfriend until 7.16 pm. - The first 911 call about the fight is at 7:16pm, reporting a fight and someone yelling help - The gunshot is at 7:16:55pm.
Zimmermans talks with police normally toward the end. Zimmerman ran after Trayvon, but stopped when he lost him. He wasn't threatened and Trayvon was not attacking him. - According to the girlfriend, they were still talking and Trayvon had a headset on when the final confrontation happened, between 7.15pm and 7.15:30pm
- The headset fell to the ground and call went dead at 7.16pm. Girlfriend heard Trayvon: “Why are you following me?” Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”
The fight lasted at the most a minute and a half before Trayvon got shot (source). In the 911 call someone is heard screaming help for over a minute, ending with the gunshot. Zimmerman claims it was him, Trayvons family claims it was Trayvon. The call is in the video bellow:
A minute and a half is what is up for debate. My personal thoughts: A person was yelling help for one minute. In that small community someone was bound to come outside and help him if it was Zimmerman. Several people called 911 minutes after the gunshot and 2 minutes later someone takes a picture of Zimmermans backhead.
The community had a history of burglaries, they knew Zimmerman, were probably friends, and appointed him neighborhood watch. Surely they would have recognized his voice screaming for help and would come out to help him.
The conclusion I draw is that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. He was in his community and if he shouted for help he could count on people to come out and help him. To shoot a 17 y/o kid after fighting for a minute?
You are drawing conclusions based on some really big assumptions: 1. That people would have been able to hear him screaming for help and they would have came to his aid 2. That he had a back up plan in case his life was in danger (people to count on to help him) 3. That it was Trayvon, not George Zimmerman, screaming for help 4. That a minute is not enough time to determine if your life is in danger
1 is wrong because a woman calls 911 for help and doesn't go outside and even says "I don't want to go out there" while on the phone. 2 is based on nothing. 3 Contradicts 1 and 2 and doesn't make any sense either because George Zimmerman was the one having his face and head smashed by Trayvons fist. The autopsy revealed that the only injuries Trayvon had were the gunshot wound in his chest, shot at intermediate range (1-18 inches), and one small abrasian on his left ring finger below the knuckle. Why would he be the one screaming if George Zimmerman was the one being punched? Why would he be screaming before he got shot when the only injury he sustained before that moment was the one on his fist? 4 is just false, especially if your head is bouncing between someones fist and the concrete, I'm sure many people would feel like their life was in danger if no one is coming to help them.
The "expert" analysis who "put his reputation" on the line said he was 95% certain that it was NOT George Zimmerman. Aside from the obvious of that not making any sense at all based on the context and the injuries both had, is one experts opinion that there is only 5% chance that it was Zimmerman screaming enough for reasonable doubt? Yes.
The screaming happened away from the road in a more quiet portion of the neighborhood. People would have heard them screaming. It's why someone called 911 without "going outside" because they did hear the screaming.
What we have is an armed man who had walked closer to the victim's house than he did his car--showing that he did follow the victim. The victim ends up dead after being followed by an armed man with a history of anger issues. The victim was walking towards his home, as can be seen on the map, and the shooter was walking away from his car, as can also be seen on the map.
A struggle happened wherein one or both the people called out for help--an argument is now in session about who it was that did.
People keep bringing up injuries as if it says anything; it should make sense that Travyon has less injuries than Zman, Zman because Travyon was the one unarmed. His life being threatened by an armed man, he charges at him has to use fists to deal damage to his attacker; in the end he lost the encounter. If they did speak then Travyon would be less than 21 feet away from Zman and hence had a chance to charge him before he got shot.
It's also possible that Travyon, after being only down the street from his house, randomly decides to attack some random person on the street for no reason. I guess, if you believe black people normally do that, you can see that as plausible.
What we do know is that a fight occurred. Both sides have evidence suggesting that the other person initiated it. In the end it's about what is more believable. That a black kid randomly attacks people he sees on the streets, or that an armed vigilante got trigger happy after following a stranger despite being told by authorities not to do that.
So you are making even more assumptions without proof and dismissing the injuries as irrelevant in determining who was screaming during the phone call.
A few assumptions 1. That he was told not to follow Trayvon. False. He said he was following him and the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to do that. That's not an order, and even if it was, he isn't obligated to "obey orders". 2. That Zimmerman threatened Trayvon with a gun before they started fighting. Plausible, but still just an assumption.
Aside from that your post is just race-baiting nonsense. You're more concerned about what sounds more believable to you than the facts.
If it's race baiting non-sense then why would a kid walking home randomly attack someone?
The facts is that we don't know who instigated it.
You believe that since Zman had injuries the victim must have instigated the attack, it's also possible that the victim was acting in self defense after perceiving the threat of a gun. Both lead to the same injuries and hence the injuries don't prove anything--only that a fight happened.
You then have to then ask "why" the fight happened. To some, it makes sense a black kid randomly attacks someone. To others, it makes sense that a vigilante got cocky. This is what is up for debate.
The only thing not up for debate is that Zman shot a kid who was walking home. The only thing not up for debate is that after being asked by the authorities not to follow the kid, he does so anyway. How do I know? Because if he went back to his car and drove home none of this would have happened. Instead he walked away from his car and ended down the block from the victim's home.
Does it make sense to me that a guy holding a gun who follows someone around ends up shooting someone--yes it does make sense to me. Does it make sense to me that a kid who is almost home would randomly start a fight for no reason? No, it doesn't. But that is what's up for debate.
You're still twisting the words to fit your narrative. He was not asked by the authorities to do anything. He was told it wasn't needed, big difference.
If George was in fact pointing his gun at Trayvon and threatening his life, how could he have retained control over his gun while getting the shit beat out of him? So he was just holding it in his hands pointing it at Trayvon, then he gets knocked on the ground and repeatedly punched while still holding the gun, not pulling the trigger, screaming for help, and finally after 40ish seconds of no help he decides to pull the trigger. Meanwhile all of this time Trayvon is just like "oh man I hope he doesn't shoot me with that gun but I'm gonna keep wailing on his head". That sounds like it makes more sense than George Zimmermans account.
On May 30 2013 22:21 Lt_Stork wrote: Let's try to go through the event leading up to the gunshot. The 911 dispatcher is asking if he's following Trayvon and telling him he doesn't need to do that at 7.12 pm.
- He doesn't follow and stays on the phone until 7.13:41 pm. Call ends. - During this time Trayvon is on the phone with his girlfriend until 7.16 pm. - The first 911 call about the fight is at 7:16pm, reporting a fight and someone yelling help - The gunshot is at 7:16:55pm.
Zimmermans talks with police normally toward the end. Zimmerman ran after Trayvon, but stopped when he lost him. He wasn't threatened and Trayvon was not attacking him. - According to the girlfriend, they were still talking and Trayvon had a headset on when the final confrontation happened, between 7.15pm and 7.15:30pm
- The headset fell to the ground and call went dead at 7.16pm. Girlfriend heard Trayvon: “Why are you following me?” Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”
The fight lasted at the most a minute and a half before Trayvon got shot (source). In the 911 call someone is heard screaming help for over a minute, ending with the gunshot. Zimmerman claims it was him, Trayvons family claims it was Trayvon. The call is in the video bellow:
A minute and a half is what is up for debate. My personal thoughts: A person was yelling help for one minute. In that small community someone was bound to come outside and help him if it was Zimmerman. Several people called 911 minutes after the gunshot and 2 minutes later someone takes a picture of Zimmermans backhead.
The community had a history of burglaries, they knew Zimmerman, were probably friends, and appointed him neighborhood watch. Surely they would have recognized his voice screaming for help and would come out to help him.
The conclusion I draw is that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. He was in his community and if he shouted for help he could count on people to come out and help him. To shoot a 17 y/o kid after fighting for a minute?
You are drawing conclusions based on some really big assumptions: 1. That people would have been able to hear him screaming for help and they would have came to his aid 2. That he had a back up plan in case his life was in danger (people to count on to help him) 3. That it was Trayvon, not George Zimmerman, screaming for help 4. That a minute is not enough time to determine if your life is in danger
1 is wrong because a woman calls 911 for help and doesn't go outside and even says "I don't want to go out there" while on the phone. 2 is based on nothing. 3 Contradicts 1 and 2 and doesn't make any sense either because George Zimmerman was the one having his face and head smashed by Trayvons fist. The autopsy revealed that the only injuries Trayvon had were the gunshot wound in his chest, shot at intermediate range (1-18 inches), and one small abrasian on his left ring finger below the knuckle. Why would he be the one screaming if George Zimmerman was the one being punched? Why would he be screaming before he got shot when the only injury he sustained before that moment was the one on his fist? 4 is just false, especially if your head is bouncing between someones fist and the concrete, I'm sure many people would feel like their life was in danger if no one is coming to help them.
The "expert" analysis who "put his reputation" on the line said he was 95% certain that it was NOT George Zimmerman. Aside from the obvious of that not making any sense at all based on the context and the injuries both had, is one experts opinion that there is only 5% chance that it was Zimmerman screaming enough for reasonable doubt? Yes.
The screaming happened away from the road in a more quiet portion of the neighborhood. People would have heard them screaming. It's why someone called 911 without "going outside" because they did hear the screaming.
What we have is an armed man who had walked closer to the victim's house than he did his car--showing that he did follow the victim. The victim ends up dead after being followed by an armed man with a history of anger issues. The victim was walking towards his home, as can be seen on the map, and the shooter was walking away from his car, as can also be seen on the map.
A struggle happened wherein one or both the people called out for help--an argument is now in session about who it was that did.
People keep bringing up injuries as if it says anything; it should make sense that Travyon has less injuries than Zman, Zman because Travyon was the one unarmed. His life being threatened by an armed man, he charges at him has to use fists to deal damage to his attacker; in the end he lost the encounter. If they did speak then Travyon would be less than 21 feet away from Zman and hence had a chance to charge him before he got shot.
It's also possible that Travyon, after being only down the street from his house, randomly decides to attack some random person on the street for no reason. I guess, if you believe black people normally do that, you can see that as plausible.
What we do know is that a fight occurred. Both sides have evidence suggesting that the other person initiated it. In the end it's about what is more believable. That a black kid randomly attacks people he sees on the streets, or that an armed vigilante got trigger happy after following a stranger despite being told by authorities not to do that.
So you are making even more assumptions without proof and dismissing the injuries as irrelevant in determining who was screaming during the phone call.
A few assumptions 1. That he was told not to follow Trayvon. False. He said he was following him and the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to do that. That's not an order, and even if it was, he isn't obligated to "obey orders". 2. That Zimmerman threatened Trayvon with a gun before they started fighting. Plausible, but still just an assumption.
Aside from that your post is just race-baiting nonsense. You're more concerned about what sounds more believable to you than the facts.
If it's race baiting non-sense then why would a kid walking home randomly attack someone?
The facts is that we don't know who instigated it.
You believe that since Zman had injuries the victim must have instigated the attack, it's also possible that the victim was acting in self defense after perceiving the threat of a gun. Both lead to the same injuries and hence the injuries don't prove anything--only that a fight happened.
You then have to then ask "why" the fight happened. To some, it makes sense a black kid randomly attacks someone. To others, it makes sense that a vigilante got cocky. This is what is up for debate.
The only thing not up for debate is that Zman shot a kid who was walking home. The only thing not up for debate is that after being asked by the authorities not to follow the kid, he does so anyway. How do I know? Because if he went back to his car and drove home none of this would have happened. Instead he walked away from his car and ended down the block from the victim's home.
Does it make sense to me that a guy holding a gun who follows someone around ends up shooting someone--yes it does make sense to me. Does it make sense to me that a kid who is almost home would randomly start a fight for no reason? No, it doesn't. But that is what's up for debate.
You're still twisting the words to fit your narrative. He was not asked by the authorities to do anything. He was told it wasn't needed, big difference.
If George was in fact pointing his gun at Trayvon and threatening his life, how could he have retained control over his gun while getting the shit beat out of him? So he was just holding it in his hands pointing it at Trayvon, then he gets knocked on the ground and repeatedly punched while still holding the gun, not pulling the trigger, screaming for help, and finally after 40ish seconds of no help he decides to pull the trigger. Meanwhile all of this time Trayvon is just like "oh man I hope he doesn't shoot me with that gun but I'm gonna keep wailing on his head". That sounds like it makes more sense than George Zimmermans account.
Or maybe he was trying to point the gun at Travyon and Travyon did everything he could to not get shot until the gun finally found its mark.
We still don't know who yelled for help, an expert says it was Travyon, you say it was Zman, hence that is up for debate.
On May 31 2013 05:55 GwSC wrote: Oh look, it's someone presenting the "This is what happened, if you think otherwise you're a racist" argument, yet again.
I am kind of interested in your viewpoint. Why do you think Martin would attack Zimmerman?
I have no idea. I do not follow all this as closely as some people do. I just would prefer that if people want to make the argument "This is what happened and you're a racist if you think otherwise", they would not try to beat around the bush and instead just say it outright.
Some people think that when a person with a gun follows you for more than a block and ends up shooting you that he is more likely to have instigated a fight.
Others think a kid walking home would instigate a fight.
Of course that doesn't make sense since why would a kid that is walking home randomly start a fight? Oh right, there is one reason why you would think it would make sense why a black kid would randomly start a fight.
If you have other reasons why a kid would randomly start fights on his way home--please enlighten us.
Why does him being black have anything to do with it? Are you racist? How about it's completely plausible that a person who looked like they were doing something wrong (hint: it's not being black) was questioned by someone who was looking out his neighborhood? He was aware of reported break-ins and saw someone he didn't recognize walking behind houses.
Not my picture, the OP's picture. (You did read the OP right?)
And I asked you for a reason why it makes sense a kid would attack someone when he's almost home. Because I can't think of any. I don't think any sane person can think of any. The only type of person who I can see coming to that conclusion is someone who thinks it makes sense black kids randomly attack people.
However, if what you're saying is true, and an armed man starts harassing travyon--then it's really Zman who initiates the fight with his harassment. That I could also see.
This means it could be:
a) Cocky vigilante b) Zman harasses Travyon c) Travyon attacks someone for some reason
Any other possibilities?
You're still making a mistake in attempting to strengthen your argument by attacking the character of anyone who proposes a different version of what happened. A black kid "randomly attacking" someone is far from the only possible explanation. Maybe Zimmerman followed Trayvon, confronted him, Trayvon got angry because of the manner in which he was confronted (or maybe he just had a bad day?) and things got physical? You dismiss this and any other similar possibility by saying that only a racist could believe that Trayvon started the fight and that Zimmerman acted in self defense.
On May 31 2013 06:19 ComaDose wrote: people know its a bad thing to be racist tho right? like... not touching on the legal side of things, zman says and does racist things. gross person.
Huh? I may be out of the loop, but what racist things has he said or done?
I've heard that Zimmerman helped get the word out that a black homeless man was beat up by a white cop for apparently no reason.
On May 30 2013 22:21 Lt_Stork wrote: Let's try to go through the event leading up to the gunshot. The 911 dispatcher is asking if he's following Trayvon and telling him he doesn't need to do that at 7.12 pm.
- He doesn't follow and stays on the phone until 7.13:41 pm. Call ends. - During this time Trayvon is on the phone with his girlfriend until 7.16 pm. - The first 911 call about the fight is at 7:16pm, reporting a fight and someone yelling help - The gunshot is at 7:16:55pm.
Zimmermans talks with police normally toward the end. Zimmerman ran after Trayvon, but stopped when he lost him. He wasn't threatened and Trayvon was not attacking him. - According to the girlfriend, they were still talking and Trayvon had a headset on when the final confrontation happened, between 7.15pm and 7.15:30pm
- The headset fell to the ground and call went dead at 7.16pm. Girlfriend heard Trayvon: “Why are you following me?” Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”
The fight lasted at the most a minute and a half before Trayvon got shot (source). In the 911 call someone is heard screaming help for over a minute, ending with the gunshot. Zimmerman claims it was him, Trayvons family claims it was Trayvon. The call is in the video bellow:
A minute and a half is what is up for debate. My personal thoughts: A person was yelling help for one minute. In that small community someone was bound to come outside and help him if it was Zimmerman. Several people called 911 minutes after the gunshot and 2 minutes later someone takes a picture of Zimmermans backhead.
The community had a history of burglaries, they knew Zimmerman, were probably friends, and appointed him neighborhood watch. Surely they would have recognized his voice screaming for help and would come out to help him.
The conclusion I draw is that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. He was in his community and if he shouted for help he could count on people to come out and help him. To shoot a 17 y/o kid after fighting for a minute?
You are drawing conclusions based on some really big assumptions: 1. That people would have been able to hear him screaming for help and they would have came to his aid 2. That he had a back up plan in case his life was in danger (people to count on to help him) 3. That it was Trayvon, not George Zimmerman, screaming for help 4. That a minute is not enough time to determine if your life is in danger
1 is wrong because a woman calls 911 for help and doesn't go outside and even says "I don't want to go out there" while on the phone. 2 is based on nothing. 3 Contradicts 1 and 2 and doesn't make any sense either because George Zimmerman was the one having his face and head smashed by Trayvons fist. The autopsy revealed that the only injuries Trayvon had were the gunshot wound in his chest, shot at intermediate range (1-18 inches), and one small abrasian on his left ring finger below the knuckle. Why would he be the one screaming if George Zimmerman was the one being punched? Why would he be screaming before he got shot when the only injury he sustained before that moment was the one on his fist? 4 is just false, especially if your head is bouncing between someones fist and the concrete, I'm sure many people would feel like their life was in danger if no one is coming to help them.
The "expert" analysis who "put his reputation" on the line said he was 95% certain that it was NOT George Zimmerman. Aside from the obvious of that not making any sense at all based on the context and the injuries both had, is one experts opinion that there is only 5% chance that it was Zimmerman screaming enough for reasonable doubt? Yes.
The screaming happened away from the road in a more quiet portion of the neighborhood. People would have heard them screaming. It's why someone called 911 without "going outside" because they did hear the screaming.
What we have is an armed man who had walked closer to the victim's house than he did his car--showing that he did follow the victim. The victim ends up dead after being followed by an armed man with a history of anger issues. The victim was walking towards his home, as can be seen on the map, and the shooter was walking away from his car, as can also be seen on the map.
A struggle happened wherein one or both the people called out for help--an argument is now in session about who it was that did.
People keep bringing up injuries as if it says anything; it should make sense that Travyon has less injuries than Zman, Zman because Travyon was the one unarmed. His life being threatened by an armed man, he charges at him has to use fists to deal damage to his attacker; in the end he lost the encounter. If they did speak then Travyon would be less than 21 feet away from Zman and hence had a chance to charge him before he got shot.
It's also possible that Travyon, after being only down the street from his house, randomly decides to attack some random person on the street for no reason. I guess, if you believe black people normally do that, you can see that as plausible.
What we do know is that a fight occurred. Both sides have evidence suggesting that the other person initiated it. In the end it's about what is more believable. That a black kid randomly attacks people he sees on the streets, or that an armed vigilante got trigger happy after following a stranger despite being told by authorities not to do that.
So you are making even more assumptions without proof and dismissing the injuries as irrelevant in determining who was screaming during the phone call.
A few assumptions 1. That he was told not to follow Trayvon. False. He said he was following him and the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to do that. That's not an order, and even if it was, he isn't obligated to "obey orders". 2. That Zimmerman threatened Trayvon with a gun before they started fighting. Plausible, but still just an assumption.
Aside from that your post is just race-baiting nonsense. You're more concerned about what sounds more believable to you than the facts.
If it's race baiting non-sense then why would a kid walking home randomly attack someone?
The facts is that we don't know who instigated it.
You believe that since Zman had injuries the victim must have instigated the attack, it's also possible that the victim was acting in self defense after perceiving the threat of a gun. Both lead to the same injuries and hence the injuries don't prove anything--only that a fight happened.
You then have to then ask "why" the fight happened. To some, it makes sense a black kid randomly attacks someone. To others, it makes sense that a vigilante got cocky. This is what is up for debate.
The only thing not up for debate is that Zman shot a kid who was walking home. The only thing not up for debate is that after being asked by the authorities not to follow the kid, he does so anyway. How do I know? Because if he went back to his car and drove home none of this would have happened. Instead he walked away from his car and ended down the block from the victim's home.
Does it make sense to me that a guy holding a gun who follows someone around ends up shooting someone--yes it does make sense to me. Does it make sense to me that a kid who is almost home would randomly start a fight for no reason? No, it doesn't. But that is what's up for debate.
You're still twisting the words to fit your narrative. He was not asked by the authorities to do anything. He was told it wasn't needed, big difference.
If George was in fact pointing his gun at Trayvon and threatening his life, how could he have retained control over his gun while getting the shit beat out of him? So he was just holding it in his hands pointing it at Trayvon, then he gets knocked on the ground and repeatedly punched while still holding the gun, not pulling the trigger, screaming for help, and finally after 40ish seconds of no help he decides to pull the trigger. Meanwhile all of this time Trayvon is just like "oh man I hope he doesn't shoot me with that gun but I'm gonna keep wailing on his head". That sounds like it makes more sense than George Zimmermans account.
Or maybe he was trying to point the gun at Travyon and Travyon did everything he could to not get shot until the gun finally found its mark.
We still don't know who yelled for help, an expert says it was Travyon, you say it was Zman, hence that is up for debate.
You really love doing this thing where you try to turn it into a debate between me and experts instead of a debate between me and you, it's pretty cowardly to be honest. Why don't you stand by your claims instead of constantly saying "experts disagree with you". How about "I disagree with you?" Guess what, other experts also said that the voice was Zimmermans.
Audio experts gave differing opinions on whether screams for help captured on 911 calls were those of neighborhood watch leader George Zimmerman or the 17-year-old teen he fatally shot last year. One audio expert said in a report released Tuesday that the screams came from Trayvon Martin, while another audio expert says the shouts were a mix of Martin and Zimmerman
On May 30 2013 22:21 Lt_Stork wrote: Let's try to go through the event leading up to the gunshot. The 911 dispatcher is asking if he's following Trayvon and telling him he doesn't need to do that at 7.12 pm.
- He doesn't follow and stays on the phone until 7.13:41 pm. Call ends. - During this time Trayvon is on the phone with his girlfriend until 7.16 pm. - The first 911 call about the fight is at 7:16pm, reporting a fight and someone yelling help - The gunshot is at 7:16:55pm.
Zimmermans talks with police normally toward the end. Zimmerman ran after Trayvon, but stopped when he lost him. He wasn't threatened and Trayvon was not attacking him. - According to the girlfriend, they were still talking and Trayvon had a headset on when the final confrontation happened, between 7.15pm and 7.15:30pm
- The headset fell to the ground and call went dead at 7.16pm. Girlfriend heard Trayvon: “Why are you following me?” Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”
The fight lasted at the most a minute and a half before Trayvon got shot (source). In the 911 call someone is heard screaming help for over a minute, ending with the gunshot. Zimmerman claims it was him, Trayvons family claims it was Trayvon. The call is in the video bellow:
A minute and a half is what is up for debate. My personal thoughts: A person was yelling help for one minute. In that small community someone was bound to come outside and help him if it was Zimmerman. Several people called 911 minutes after the gunshot and 2 minutes later someone takes a picture of Zimmermans backhead.
The community had a history of burglaries, they knew Zimmerman, were probably friends, and appointed him neighborhood watch. Surely they would have recognized his voice screaming for help and would come out to help him.
The conclusion I draw is that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. He was in his community and if he shouted for help he could count on people to come out and help him. To shoot a 17 y/o kid after fighting for a minute?
You are drawing conclusions based on some really big assumptions: 1. That people would have been able to hear him screaming for help and they would have came to his aid 2. That he had a back up plan in case his life was in danger (people to count on to help him) 3. That it was Trayvon, not George Zimmerman, screaming for help 4. That a minute is not enough time to determine if your life is in danger
1 is wrong because a woman calls 911 for help and doesn't go outside and even says "I don't want to go out there" while on the phone. 2 is based on nothing. 3 Contradicts 1 and 2 and doesn't make any sense either because George Zimmerman was the one having his face and head smashed by Trayvons fist. The autopsy revealed that the only injuries Trayvon had were the gunshot wound in his chest, shot at intermediate range (1-18 inches), and one small abrasian on his left ring finger below the knuckle. Why would he be the one screaming if George Zimmerman was the one being punched? Why would he be screaming before he got shot when the only injury he sustained before that moment was the one on his fist? 4 is just false, especially if your head is bouncing between someones fist and the concrete, I'm sure many people would feel like their life was in danger if no one is coming to help them.
The "expert" analysis who "put his reputation" on the line said he was 95% certain that it was NOT George Zimmerman. Aside from the obvious of that not making any sense at all based on the context and the injuries both had, is one experts opinion that there is only 5% chance that it was Zimmerman screaming enough for reasonable doubt? Yes.
The screaming happened away from the road in a more quiet portion of the neighborhood. People would have heard them screaming. It's why someone called 911 without "going outside" because they did hear the screaming.
What we have is an armed man who had walked closer to the victim's house than he did his car--showing that he did follow the victim. The victim ends up dead after being followed by an armed man with a history of anger issues. The victim was walking towards his home, as can be seen on the map, and the shooter was walking away from his car, as can also be seen on the map.
A struggle happened wherein one or both the people called out for help--an argument is now in session about who it was that did.
People keep bringing up injuries as if it says anything; it should make sense that Travyon has less injuries than Zman, Zman because Travyon was the one unarmed. His life being threatened by an armed man, he charges at him has to use fists to deal damage to his attacker; in the end he lost the encounter. If they did speak then Travyon would be less than 21 feet away from Zman and hence had a chance to charge him before he got shot.
It's also possible that Travyon, after being only down the street from his house, randomly decides to attack some random person on the street for no reason. I guess, if you believe black people normally do that, you can see that as plausible.
What we do know is that a fight occurred. Both sides have evidence suggesting that the other person initiated it. In the end it's about what is more believable. That a black kid randomly attacks people he sees on the streets, or that an armed vigilante got trigger happy after following a stranger despite being told by authorities not to do that.
So you are making even more assumptions without proof and dismissing the injuries as irrelevant in determining who was screaming during the phone call.
A few assumptions 1. That he was told not to follow Trayvon. False. He said he was following him and the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to do that. That's not an order, and even if it was, he isn't obligated to "obey orders". 2. That Zimmerman threatened Trayvon with a gun before they started fighting. Plausible, but still just an assumption.
Aside from that your post is just race-baiting nonsense. You're more concerned about what sounds more believable to you than the facts.
If it's race baiting non-sense then why would a kid walking home randomly attack someone?
The facts is that we don't know who instigated it.
You believe that since Zman had injuries the victim must have instigated the attack, it's also possible that the victim was acting in self defense after perceiving the threat of a gun. Both lead to the same injuries and hence the injuries don't prove anything--only that a fight happened.
You then have to then ask "why" the fight happened. To some, it makes sense a black kid randomly attacks someone. To others, it makes sense that a vigilante got cocky. This is what is up for debate.
The only thing not up for debate is that Zman shot a kid who was walking home. The only thing not up for debate is that after being asked by the authorities not to follow the kid, he does so anyway. How do I know? Because if he went back to his car and drove home none of this would have happened. Instead he walked away from his car and ended down the block from the victim's home.
Does it make sense to me that a guy holding a gun who follows someone around ends up shooting someone--yes it does make sense to me. Does it make sense to me that a kid who is almost home would randomly start a fight for no reason? No, it doesn't. But that is what's up for debate.
You're still twisting the words to fit your narrative. He was not asked by the authorities to do anything. He was told it wasn't needed, big difference.
If George was in fact pointing his gun at Trayvon and threatening his life, how could he have retained control over his gun while getting the shit beat out of him? So he was just holding it in his hands pointing it at Trayvon, then he gets knocked on the ground and repeatedly punched while still holding the gun, not pulling the trigger, screaming for help, and finally after 40ish seconds of no help he decides to pull the trigger. Meanwhile all of this time Trayvon is just like "oh man I hope he doesn't shoot me with that gun but I'm gonna keep wailing on his head". That sounds like it makes more sense than George Zimmermans account.
Or maybe he was trying to point the gun at Travyon and Travyon did everything he could to not get shot until the gun finally found its mark.
We still don't know who yelled for help, an expert says it was Travyon, you say it was Zman, hence that is up for debate.
It really doesn't make sense for Martin to attack a man who is pointing a gun at him. Black people do not randomly attack people, but they also don't try to punch people who have a gun.
On May 31 2013 06:19 ComaDose wrote: people know its a bad thing to be racist tho right? like... not touching on the legal side of things, zman says and does racist things. gross person.
Huh? I may be out of the loop, but what racist things has he said or done?
I've heard that Zimmerman helped get the word out that a black homeless man was beat up by a white cop for apparently no reason.
from the op: Some residents of his gated townhouse community declared that Zimmerman was known for being strict and that he went door to door asking them to be on the lookout for "young black men who appear to be outsiders",
On May 30 2013 22:21 Lt_Stork wrote: Let's try to go through the event leading up to the gunshot. The 911 dispatcher is asking if he's following Trayvon and telling him he doesn't need to do that at 7.12 pm.
- He doesn't follow and stays on the phone until 7.13:41 pm. Call ends. - During this time Trayvon is on the phone with his girlfriend until 7.16 pm. - The first 911 call about the fight is at 7:16pm, reporting a fight and someone yelling help - The gunshot is at 7:16:55pm.
Zimmermans talks with police normally toward the end. Zimmerman ran after Trayvon, but stopped when he lost him. He wasn't threatened and Trayvon was not attacking him. - According to the girlfriend, they were still talking and Trayvon had a headset on when the final confrontation happened, between 7.15pm and 7.15:30pm
- The headset fell to the ground and call went dead at 7.16pm. Girlfriend heard Trayvon: “Why are you following me?” Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”
The fight lasted at the most a minute and a half before Trayvon got shot (source). In the 911 call someone is heard screaming help for over a minute, ending with the gunshot. Zimmerman claims it was him, Trayvons family claims it was Trayvon. The call is in the video bellow:
A minute and a half is what is up for debate. My personal thoughts: A person was yelling help for one minute. In that small community someone was bound to come outside and help him if it was Zimmerman. Several people called 911 minutes after the gunshot and 2 minutes later someone takes a picture of Zimmermans backhead.
The community had a history of burglaries, they knew Zimmerman, were probably friends, and appointed him neighborhood watch. Surely they would have recognized his voice screaming for help and would come out to help him.
The conclusion I draw is that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. He was in his community and if he shouted for help he could count on people to come out and help him. To shoot a 17 y/o kid after fighting for a minute?
You are drawing conclusions based on some really big assumptions: 1. That people would have been able to hear him screaming for help and they would have came to his aid 2. That he had a back up plan in case his life was in danger (people to count on to help him) 3. That it was Trayvon, not George Zimmerman, screaming for help 4. That a minute is not enough time to determine if your life is in danger
1 is wrong because a woman calls 911 for help and doesn't go outside and even says "I don't want to go out there" while on the phone. 2 is based on nothing. 3 Contradicts 1 and 2 and doesn't make any sense either because George Zimmerman was the one having his face and head smashed by Trayvons fist. The autopsy revealed that the only injuries Trayvon had were the gunshot wound in his chest, shot at intermediate range (1-18 inches), and one small abrasian on his left ring finger below the knuckle. Why would he be the one screaming if George Zimmerman was the one being punched? Why would he be screaming before he got shot when the only injury he sustained before that moment was the one on his fist? 4 is just false, especially if your head is bouncing between someones fist and the concrete, I'm sure many people would feel like their life was in danger if no one is coming to help them.
The "expert" analysis who "put his reputation" on the line said he was 95% certain that it was NOT George Zimmerman. Aside from the obvious of that not making any sense at all based on the context and the injuries both had, is one experts opinion that there is only 5% chance that it was Zimmerman screaming enough for reasonable doubt? Yes.
The screaming happened away from the road in a more quiet portion of the neighborhood. People would have heard them screaming. It's why someone called 911 without "going outside" because they did hear the screaming.
What we have is an armed man who had walked closer to the victim's house than he did his car--showing that he did follow the victim. The victim ends up dead after being followed by an armed man with a history of anger issues. The victim was walking towards his home, as can be seen on the map, and the shooter was walking away from his car, as can also be seen on the map.
A struggle happened wherein one or both the people called out for help--an argument is now in session about who it was that did.
People keep bringing up injuries as if it says anything; it should make sense that Travyon has less injuries than Zman, Zman because Travyon was the one unarmed. His life being threatened by an armed man, he charges at him has to use fists to deal damage to his attacker; in the end he lost the encounter. If they did speak then Travyon would be less than 21 feet away from Zman and hence had a chance to charge him before he got shot.
It's also possible that Travyon, after being only down the street from his house, randomly decides to attack some random person on the street for no reason. I guess, if you believe black people normally do that, you can see that as plausible.
What we do know is that a fight occurred. Both sides have evidence suggesting that the other person initiated it. In the end it's about what is more believable. That a black kid randomly attacks people he sees on the streets, or that an armed vigilante got trigger happy after following a stranger despite being told by authorities not to do that.
So you are making even more assumptions without proof and dismissing the injuries as irrelevant in determining who was screaming during the phone call.
A few assumptions 1. That he was told not to follow Trayvon. False. He said he was following him and the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to do that. That's not an order, and even if it was, he isn't obligated to "obey orders". 2. That Zimmerman threatened Trayvon with a gun before they started fighting. Plausible, but still just an assumption.
Aside from that your post is just race-baiting nonsense. You're more concerned about what sounds more believable to you than the facts.
If it's race baiting non-sense then why would a kid walking home randomly attack someone?
The facts is that we don't know who instigated it.
You believe that since Zman had injuries the victim must have instigated the attack, it's also possible that the victim was acting in self defense after perceiving the threat of a gun. Both lead to the same injuries and hence the injuries don't prove anything--only that a fight happened.
You then have to then ask "why" the fight happened. To some, it makes sense a black kid randomly attacks someone. To others, it makes sense that a vigilante got cocky. This is what is up for debate.
The only thing not up for debate is that Zman shot a kid who was walking home. The only thing not up for debate is that after being asked by the authorities not to follow the kid, he does so anyway. How do I know? Because if he went back to his car and drove home none of this would have happened. Instead he walked away from his car and ended down the block from the victim's home.
Does it make sense to me that a guy holding a gun who follows someone around ends up shooting someone--yes it does make sense to me. Does it make sense to me that a kid who is almost home would randomly start a fight for no reason? No, it doesn't. But that is what's up for debate.
You're still twisting the words to fit your narrative. He was not asked by the authorities to do anything. He was told it wasn't needed, big difference.
If George was in fact pointing his gun at Trayvon and threatening his life, how could he have retained control over his gun while getting the shit beat out of him? So he was just holding it in his hands pointing it at Trayvon, then he gets knocked on the ground and repeatedly punched while still holding the gun, not pulling the trigger, screaming for help, and finally after 40ish seconds of no help he decides to pull the trigger. Meanwhile all of this time Trayvon is just like "oh man I hope he doesn't shoot me with that gun but I'm gonna keep wailing on his head". That sounds like it makes more sense than George Zimmermans account.
Or maybe he was trying to point the gun at Travyon and Travyon did everything he could to not get shot until the gun finally found its mark.
We still don't know who yelled for help, an expert says it was Travyon, you say it was Zman, hence that is up for debate.
It really doesn't make sense for Martin to attack a man who is pointing a gun at him. Black people do not randomly attack people, but they also don't try to punch people who have a gun.
It is more plausible if Martin didn't realize Zimmerman had a gun. Has it been established in the case that Zimmerman had his gun out when he confronted Martin?
On May 30 2013 22:21 Lt_Stork wrote: Let's try to go through the event leading up to the gunshot. The 911 dispatcher is asking if he's following Trayvon and telling him he doesn't need to do that at 7.12 pm.
- He doesn't follow and stays on the phone until 7.13:41 pm. Call ends. - During this time Trayvon is on the phone with his girlfriend until 7.16 pm. - The first 911 call about the fight is at 7:16pm, reporting a fight and someone yelling help - The gunshot is at 7:16:55pm.
Zimmermans talks with police normally toward the end. Zimmerman ran after Trayvon, but stopped when he lost him. He wasn't threatened and Trayvon was not attacking him. - According to the girlfriend, they were still talking and Trayvon had a headset on when the final confrontation happened, between 7.15pm and 7.15:30pm
- The headset fell to the ground and call went dead at 7.16pm. Girlfriend heard Trayvon: “Why are you following me?” Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”
The fight lasted at the most a minute and a half before Trayvon got shot (source). In the 911 call someone is heard screaming help for over a minute, ending with the gunshot. Zimmerman claims it was him, Trayvons family claims it was Trayvon. The call is in the video bellow:
A minute and a half is what is up for debate. My personal thoughts: A person was yelling help for one minute. In that small community someone was bound to come outside and help him if it was Zimmerman. Several people called 911 minutes after the gunshot and 2 minutes later someone takes a picture of Zimmermans backhead.
The community had a history of burglaries, they knew Zimmerman, were probably friends, and appointed him neighborhood watch. Surely they would have recognized his voice screaming for help and would come out to help him.
The conclusion I draw is that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. He was in his community and if he shouted for help he could count on people to come out and help him. To shoot a 17 y/o kid after fighting for a minute?
You are drawing conclusions based on some really big assumptions: 1. That people would have been able to hear him screaming for help and they would have came to his aid 2. That he had a back up plan in case his life was in danger (people to count on to help him) 3. That it was Trayvon, not George Zimmerman, screaming for help 4. That a minute is not enough time to determine if your life is in danger
1 is wrong because a woman calls 911 for help and doesn't go outside and even says "I don't want to go out there" while on the phone. 2 is based on nothing. 3 Contradicts 1 and 2 and doesn't make any sense either because George Zimmerman was the one having his face and head smashed by Trayvons fist. The autopsy revealed that the only injuries Trayvon had were the gunshot wound in his chest, shot at intermediate range (1-18 inches), and one small abrasian on his left ring finger below the knuckle. Why would he be the one screaming if George Zimmerman was the one being punched? Why would he be screaming before he got shot when the only injury he sustained before that moment was the one on his fist? 4 is just false, especially if your head is bouncing between someones fist and the concrete, I'm sure many people would feel like their life was in danger if no one is coming to help them.
The "expert" analysis who "put his reputation" on the line said he was 95% certain that it was NOT George Zimmerman. Aside from the obvious of that not making any sense at all based on the context and the injuries both had, is one experts opinion that there is only 5% chance that it was Zimmerman screaming enough for reasonable doubt? Yes.
The screaming happened away from the road in a more quiet portion of the neighborhood. People would have heard them screaming. It's why someone called 911 without "going outside" because they did hear the screaming.
What we have is an armed man who had walked closer to the victim's house than he did his car--showing that he did follow the victim. The victim ends up dead after being followed by an armed man with a history of anger issues. The victim was walking towards his home, as can be seen on the map, and the shooter was walking away from his car, as can also be seen on the map.
A struggle happened wherein one or both the people called out for help--an argument is now in session about who it was that did.
People keep bringing up injuries as if it says anything; it should make sense that Travyon has less injuries than Zman, Zman because Travyon was the one unarmed. His life being threatened by an armed man, he charges at him has to use fists to deal damage to his attacker; in the end he lost the encounter. If they did speak then Travyon would be less than 21 feet away from Zman and hence had a chance to charge him before he got shot.
It's also possible that Travyon, after being only down the street from his house, randomly decides to attack some random person on the street for no reason. I guess, if you believe black people normally do that, you can see that as plausible.
What we do know is that a fight occurred. Both sides have evidence suggesting that the other person initiated it. In the end it's about what is more believable. That a black kid randomly attacks people he sees on the streets, or that an armed vigilante got trigger happy after following a stranger despite being told by authorities not to do that.
So you are making even more assumptions without proof and dismissing the injuries as irrelevant in determining who was screaming during the phone call.
A few assumptions 1. That he was told not to follow Trayvon. False. He said he was following him and the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to do that. That's not an order, and even if it was, he isn't obligated to "obey orders". 2. That Zimmerman threatened Trayvon with a gun before they started fighting. Plausible, but still just an assumption.
Aside from that your post is just race-baiting nonsense. You're more concerned about what sounds more believable to you than the facts.
If it's race baiting non-sense then why would a kid walking home randomly attack someone?
The facts is that we don't know who instigated it.
You believe that since Zman had injuries the victim must have instigated the attack, it's also possible that the victim was acting in self defense after perceiving the threat of a gun. Both lead to the same injuries and hence the injuries don't prove anything--only that a fight happened.
You then have to then ask "why" the fight happened. To some, it makes sense a black kid randomly attacks someone. To others, it makes sense that a vigilante got cocky. This is what is up for debate.
The only thing not up for debate is that Zman shot a kid who was walking home. The only thing not up for debate is that after being asked by the authorities not to follow the kid, he does so anyway. How do I know? Because if he went back to his car and drove home none of this would have happened. Instead he walked away from his car and ended down the block from the victim's home.
Does it make sense to me that a guy holding a gun who follows someone around ends up shooting someone--yes it does make sense to me. Does it make sense to me that a kid who is almost home would randomly start a fight for no reason? No, it doesn't. But that is what's up for debate.
You're still twisting the words to fit your narrative. He was not asked by the authorities to do anything. He was told it wasn't needed, big difference.
If George was in fact pointing his gun at Trayvon and threatening his life, how could he have retained control over his gun while getting the shit beat out of him? So he was just holding it in his hands pointing it at Trayvon, then he gets knocked on the ground and repeatedly punched while still holding the gun, not pulling the trigger, screaming for help, and finally after 40ish seconds of no help he decides to pull the trigger. Meanwhile all of this time Trayvon is just like "oh man I hope he doesn't shoot me with that gun but I'm gonna keep wailing on his head". That sounds like it makes more sense than George Zimmermans account.
Or maybe he was trying to point the gun at Travyon and Travyon did everything he could to not get shot until the gun finally found its mark.
We still don't know who yelled for help, an expert says it was Travyon, you say it was Zman, hence that is up for debate.
It really doesn't make sense for Martin to attack a man who is pointing a gun at him. Black people do not randomly attack people, but they also don't try to punch people who have a gun.
It is more plausible if Martin didn't realize Zimmerman had a gun. Has it been established in the case that Zimmerman had his gun out when he confronted Martin?
No Magpie thinks that makes more sense than Martin randomly attacking Zimmerman. Obviously if you think that it's more likely for a black person to attack somebody who is unarmed than somebody pointing a gun at them that means you are racist.
On May 30 2013 22:21 Lt_Stork wrote: Let's try to go through the event leading up to the gunshot. The 911 dispatcher is asking if he's following Trayvon and telling him he doesn't need to do that at 7.12 pm.
- He doesn't follow and stays on the phone until 7.13:41 pm. Call ends. - During this time Trayvon is on the phone with his girlfriend until 7.16 pm. - The first 911 call about the fight is at 7:16pm, reporting a fight and someone yelling help - The gunshot is at 7:16:55pm.
Zimmermans talks with police normally toward the end. Zimmerman ran after Trayvon, but stopped when he lost him. He wasn't threatened and Trayvon was not attacking him. - According to the girlfriend, they were still talking and Trayvon had a headset on when the final confrontation happened, between 7.15pm and 7.15:30pm
- The headset fell to the ground and call went dead at 7.16pm. Girlfriend heard Trayvon: “Why are you following me?” Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”
The fight lasted at the most a minute and a half before Trayvon got shot (source). In the 911 call someone is heard screaming help for over a minute, ending with the gunshot. Zimmerman claims it was him, Trayvons family claims it was Trayvon. The call is in the video bellow:
A minute and a half is what is up for debate. My personal thoughts: A person was yelling help for one minute. In that small community someone was bound to come outside and help him if it was Zimmerman. Several people called 911 minutes after the gunshot and 2 minutes later someone takes a picture of Zimmermans backhead.
The community had a history of burglaries, they knew Zimmerman, were probably friends, and appointed him neighborhood watch. Surely they would have recognized his voice screaming for help and would come out to help him.
The conclusion I draw is that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. He was in his community and if he shouted for help he could count on people to come out and help him. To shoot a 17 y/o kid after fighting for a minute?
You are drawing conclusions based on some really big assumptions: 1. That people would have been able to hear him screaming for help and they would have came to his aid 2. That he had a back up plan in case his life was in danger (people to count on to help him) 3. That it was Trayvon, not George Zimmerman, screaming for help 4. That a minute is not enough time to determine if your life is in danger
1 is wrong because a woman calls 911 for help and doesn't go outside and even says "I don't want to go out there" while on the phone. 2 is based on nothing. 3 Contradicts 1 and 2 and doesn't make any sense either because George Zimmerman was the one having his face and head smashed by Trayvons fist. The autopsy revealed that the only injuries Trayvon had were the gunshot wound in his chest, shot at intermediate range (1-18 inches), and one small abrasian on his left ring finger below the knuckle. Why would he be the one screaming if George Zimmerman was the one being punched? Why would he be screaming before he got shot when the only injury he sustained before that moment was the one on his fist? 4 is just false, especially if your head is bouncing between someones fist and the concrete, I'm sure many people would feel like their life was in danger if no one is coming to help them.
The "expert" analysis who "put his reputation" on the line said he was 95% certain that it was NOT George Zimmerman. Aside from the obvious of that not making any sense at all based on the context and the injuries both had, is one experts opinion that there is only 5% chance that it was Zimmerman screaming enough for reasonable doubt? Yes.
The screaming happened away from the road in a more quiet portion of the neighborhood. People would have heard them screaming. It's why someone called 911 without "going outside" because they did hear the screaming.
What we have is an armed man who had walked closer to the victim's house than he did his car--showing that he did follow the victim. The victim ends up dead after being followed by an armed man with a history of anger issues. The victim was walking towards his home, as can be seen on the map, and the shooter was walking away from his car, as can also be seen on the map.
A struggle happened wherein one or both the people called out for help--an argument is now in session about who it was that did.
People keep bringing up injuries as if it says anything; it should make sense that Travyon has less injuries than Zman, Zman because Travyon was the one unarmed. His life being threatened by an armed man, he charges at him has to use fists to deal damage to his attacker; in the end he lost the encounter. If they did speak then Travyon would be less than 21 feet away from Zman and hence had a chance to charge him before he got shot.
It's also possible that Travyon, after being only down the street from his house, randomly decides to attack some random person on the street for no reason. I guess, if you believe black people normally do that, you can see that as plausible.
What we do know is that a fight occurred. Both sides have evidence suggesting that the other person initiated it. In the end it's about what is more believable. That a black kid randomly attacks people he sees on the streets, or that an armed vigilante got trigger happy after following a stranger despite being told by authorities not to do that.
So you are making even more assumptions without proof and dismissing the injuries as irrelevant in determining who was screaming during the phone call.
A few assumptions 1. That he was told not to follow Trayvon. False. He said he was following him and the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to do that. That's not an order, and even if it was, he isn't obligated to "obey orders". 2. That Zimmerman threatened Trayvon with a gun before they started fighting. Plausible, but still just an assumption.
Aside from that your post is just race-baiting nonsense. You're more concerned about what sounds more believable to you than the facts.
If it's race baiting non-sense then why would a kid walking home randomly attack someone?
The facts is that we don't know who instigated it.
You believe that since Zman had injuries the victim must have instigated the attack, it's also possible that the victim was acting in self defense after perceiving the threat of a gun. Both lead to the same injuries and hence the injuries don't prove anything--only that a fight happened.
You then have to then ask "why" the fight happened. To some, it makes sense a black kid randomly attacks someone. To others, it makes sense that a vigilante got cocky. This is what is up for debate.
The only thing not up for debate is that Zman shot a kid who was walking home. The only thing not up for debate is that after being asked by the authorities not to follow the kid, he does so anyway. How do I know? Because if he went back to his car and drove home none of this would have happened. Instead he walked away from his car and ended down the block from the victim's home.
Does it make sense to me that a guy holding a gun who follows someone around ends up shooting someone--yes it does make sense to me. Does it make sense to me that a kid who is almost home would randomly start a fight for no reason? No, it doesn't. But that is what's up for debate.
You're still twisting the words to fit your narrative. He was not asked by the authorities to do anything. He was told it wasn't needed, big difference.
If George was in fact pointing his gun at Trayvon and threatening his life, how could he have retained control over his gun while getting the shit beat out of him? So he was just holding it in his hands pointing it at Trayvon, then he gets knocked on the ground and repeatedly punched while still holding the gun, not pulling the trigger, screaming for help, and finally after 40ish seconds of no help he decides to pull the trigger. Meanwhile all of this time Trayvon is just like "oh man I hope he doesn't shoot me with that gun but I'm gonna keep wailing on his head". That sounds like it makes more sense than George Zimmermans account.
Or maybe he was trying to point the gun at Travyon and Travyon did everything he could to not get shot until the gun finally found its mark.
We still don't know who yelled for help, an expert says it was Travyon, you say it was Zman, hence that is up for debate.
You really love doing this thing where you try to turn it into a debate between me and experts instead of a debate between me and you, it's pretty cowardly to be honest. Why don't you stand by your claims instead of constantly saying "experts disagree with you". How about "I disagree with you?" Guess what, other experts also said that the voice was Zimmermans.
Audio experts gave differing opinions on whether screams for help captured on 911 calls were those of neighborhood watch leader George Zimmerman or the 17-year-old teen he fatally shot last year. One audio expert said in a report released Tuesday that the screams came from Trayvon Martin, while another audio expert says the shouts were a mix of Martin and Zimmerman
Um... I did say "hence that is up for debate" because we don't know who really yelled out help. This is not about you versus experts this is about experts versus experts. Both sides have evidence that it was their guy yelling help, that means its up for debate who was yelling for help. You act as if its already a given that Zman yelled for help, I'm showing you that that is not the case.
You pretending that it is definitively Zman who yells is you going against an expert--that's not some logic-fu I'm doing, that is you literally going against an expert.
On May 31 2013 06:19 ComaDose wrote: people know its a bad thing to be racist tho right? like... not touching on the legal side of things, zman says and does racist things. gross person.
Huh? I may be out of the loop, but what racist things has he said or done?
I've heard that Zimmerman helped get the word out that a black homeless man was beat up by a white cop for apparently no reason.
from the op: Some residents of his gated townhouse community declared that Zimmerman was known for being strict and that he went door to door asking them to be on the lookout for "young black men who appear to be outsiders",
Ah thanks, I didn't see that. Though I don't think that's racist if there were reports of black men robbing houses in the neighbourhood.
On May 31 2013 05:55 GwSC wrote: Oh look, it's someone presenting the "This is what happened, if you think otherwise you're a racist" argument, yet again.
I am kind of interested in your viewpoint. Why do you think Martin would attack Zimmerman?
I have no idea. I do not follow all this as closely as some people do. I just would prefer that if people want to make the argument "This is what happened and you're a racist if you think otherwise", they would not try to beat around the bush and instead just say it outright.
Some people think that when a person with a gun follows you for more than a block and ends up shooting you that he is more likely to have instigated a fight.
Others think a kid walking home would instigate a fight.
Of course that doesn't make sense since why would a kid that is walking home randomly start a fight? Oh right, there is one reason why you would think it would make sense why a black kid would randomly start a fight.
If you have other reasons why a kid would randomly start fights on his way home--please enlighten us.
Why does him being black have anything to do with it? Are you racist? How about it's completely plausible that a person who looked like they were doing something wrong (hint: it's not being black) was questioned by someone who was looking out his neighborhood? He was aware of reported break-ins and saw someone he didn't recognize walking behind houses.
Not my picture, the OP's picture. (You did read the OP right?)
And I asked you for a reason why it makes sense a kid would attack someone when he's almost home. Because I can't think of any. I don't think any sane person can think of any. The only type of person who I can see coming to that conclusion is someone who thinks it makes sense black kids randomly attack people.
However, if what you're saying is true, and an armed man starts harassing travyon--then it's really Zman who initiates the fight with his harassment. That I could also see.
This means it could be:
a) Cocky vigilante b) Zman harasses Travyon c) Travyon attacks someone for some reason
Any other possibilities?
You're still making a mistake in attempting to strengthen your argument by attacking the character of anyone who proposes a different version of what happened. A black kid "randomly attacking" someone is far from the only possible explanation. Maybe Zimmerman followed Trayvon, confronted him, Trayvon got angry because of the manner in which he was confronted (or maybe he just had a bad day?) and things got physical? You dismiss this and any other similar possibility by saying that only a racist could believe that Trayvon started the fight and that Zimmerman acted in self defense.
Technically what you're describing is B) Zman harasses Travyon
This would mean that it was Zman who initiated the fight.
On May 31 2013 05:55 GwSC wrote: Oh look, it's someone presenting the "This is what happened, if you think otherwise you're a racist" argument, yet again.
I am kind of interested in your viewpoint. Why do you think Martin would attack Zimmerman?
I have no idea. I do not follow all this as closely as some people do. I just would prefer that if people want to make the argument "This is what happened and you're a racist if you think otherwise", they would not try to beat around the bush and instead just say it outright.
Some people think that when a person with a gun follows you for more than a block and ends up shooting you that he is more likely to have instigated a fight.
Others think a kid walking home would instigate a fight.
Of course that doesn't make sense since why would a kid that is walking home randomly start a fight? Oh right, there is one reason why you would think it would make sense why a black kid would randomly start a fight.
If you have other reasons why a kid would randomly start fights on his way home--please enlighten us.
Why does him being black have anything to do with it? Are you racist? How about it's completely plausible that a person who looked like they were doing something wrong (hint: it's not being black) was questioned by someone who was looking out his neighborhood? He was aware of reported break-ins and saw someone he didn't recognize walking behind houses.
Not my picture, the OP's picture. (You did read the OP right?)
And I asked you for a reason why it makes sense a kid would attack someone when he's almost home. Because I can't think of any. I don't think any sane person can think of any. The only type of person who I can see coming to that conclusion is someone who thinks it makes sense black kids randomly attack people.
However, if what you're saying is true, and an armed man starts harassing travyon--then it's really Zman who initiates the fight with his harassment. That I could also see.
This means it could be:
a) Cocky vigilante b) Zman harasses Travyon c) Travyon attacks someone for some reason
Any other possibilities?
You're still making a mistake in attempting to strengthen your argument by attacking the character of anyone who proposes a different version of what happened. A black kid "randomly attacking" someone is far from the only possible explanation. Maybe Zimmerman followed Trayvon, confronted him, Trayvon got angry because of the manner in which he was confronted (or maybe he just had a bad day?) and things got physical? You dismiss this and any other similar possibility by saying that only a racist could believe that Trayvon started the fight and that Zimmerman acted in self defense.
Technically what you're describing is B) Zman harasses Travyon
This would mean that it was Zman who initiated the fight.
On a verbal level perhaps, but do you deny that it is possible that Zman said something that made Martin angry, and that Martin then attacked Zman initiating the physical fight? Or even that Zman did not even say anything purposely inflammatory and simply questioned Martin based on past troubles in the neighborhood, and Martin got angry and attacked? Depending on how you choose to believe Martin or Zimmerman are/were as people, you may think one possibility more likely than the other, but they are still possibilities that you cannot simply dismiss by calling people racist if they favor one or the other.
On May 30 2013 22:21 Lt_Stork wrote: Let's try to go through the event leading up to the gunshot. The 911 dispatcher is asking if he's following Trayvon and telling him he doesn't need to do that at 7.12 pm.
- He doesn't follow and stays on the phone until 7.13:41 pm. Call ends. - During this time Trayvon is on the phone with his girlfriend until 7.16 pm. - The first 911 call about the fight is at 7:16pm, reporting a fight and someone yelling help - The gunshot is at 7:16:55pm.
Zimmermans talks with police normally toward the end. Zimmerman ran after Trayvon, but stopped when he lost him. He wasn't threatened and Trayvon was not attacking him. - According to the girlfriend, they were still talking and Trayvon had a headset on when the final confrontation happened, between 7.15pm and 7.15:30pm
- The headset fell to the ground and call went dead at 7.16pm. Girlfriend heard Trayvon: “Why are you following me?” Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”
The fight lasted at the most a minute and a half before Trayvon got shot (source). In the 911 call someone is heard screaming help for over a minute, ending with the gunshot. Zimmerman claims it was him, Trayvons family claims it was Trayvon. The call is in the video bellow:
A minute and a half is what is up for debate. My personal thoughts: A person was yelling help for one minute. In that small community someone was bound to come outside and help him if it was Zimmerman. Several people called 911 minutes after the gunshot and 2 minutes later someone takes a picture of Zimmermans backhead.
The community had a history of burglaries, they knew Zimmerman, were probably friends, and appointed him neighborhood watch. Surely they would have recognized his voice screaming for help and would come out to help him.
The conclusion I draw is that Zimmerman's life was not in danger. He was in his community and if he shouted for help he could count on people to come out and help him. To shoot a 17 y/o kid after fighting for a minute?
You are drawing conclusions based on some really big assumptions: 1. That people would have been able to hear him screaming for help and they would have came to his aid 2. That he had a back up plan in case his life was in danger (people to count on to help him) 3. That it was Trayvon, not George Zimmerman, screaming for help 4. That a minute is not enough time to determine if your life is in danger
1 is wrong because a woman calls 911 for help and doesn't go outside and even says "I don't want to go out there" while on the phone. 2 is based on nothing. 3 Contradicts 1 and 2 and doesn't make any sense either because George Zimmerman was the one having his face and head smashed by Trayvons fist. The autopsy revealed that the only injuries Trayvon had were the gunshot wound in his chest, shot at intermediate range (1-18 inches), and one small abrasian on his left ring finger below the knuckle. Why would he be the one screaming if George Zimmerman was the one being punched? Why would he be screaming before he got shot when the only injury he sustained before that moment was the one on his fist? 4 is just false, especially if your head is bouncing between someones fist and the concrete, I'm sure many people would feel like their life was in danger if no one is coming to help them.
The "expert" analysis who "put his reputation" on the line said he was 95% certain that it was NOT George Zimmerman. Aside from the obvious of that not making any sense at all based on the context and the injuries both had, is one experts opinion that there is only 5% chance that it was Zimmerman screaming enough for reasonable doubt? Yes.
The screaming happened away from the road in a more quiet portion of the neighborhood. People would have heard them screaming. It's why someone called 911 without "going outside" because they did hear the screaming.
What we have is an armed man who had walked closer to the victim's house than he did his car--showing that he did follow the victim. The victim ends up dead after being followed by an armed man with a history of anger issues. The victim was walking towards his home, as can be seen on the map, and the shooter was walking away from his car, as can also be seen on the map.
A struggle happened wherein one or both the people called out for help--an argument is now in session about who it was that did.
People keep bringing up injuries as if it says anything; it should make sense that Travyon has less injuries than Zman, Zman because Travyon was the one unarmed. His life being threatened by an armed man, he charges at him has to use fists to deal damage to his attacker; in the end he lost the encounter. If they did speak then Travyon would be less than 21 feet away from Zman and hence had a chance to charge him before he got shot.
It's also possible that Travyon, after being only down the street from his house, randomly decides to attack some random person on the street for no reason. I guess, if you believe black people normally do that, you can see that as plausible.
What we do know is that a fight occurred. Both sides have evidence suggesting that the other person initiated it. In the end it's about what is more believable. That a black kid randomly attacks people he sees on the streets, or that an armed vigilante got trigger happy after following a stranger despite being told by authorities not to do that.
So you are making even more assumptions without proof and dismissing the injuries as irrelevant in determining who was screaming during the phone call.
A few assumptions 1. That he was told not to follow Trayvon. False. He said he was following him and the dispatcher told him they didn't need him to do that. That's not an order, and even if it was, he isn't obligated to "obey orders". 2. That Zimmerman threatened Trayvon with a gun before they started fighting. Plausible, but still just an assumption.
Aside from that your post is just race-baiting nonsense. You're more concerned about what sounds more believable to you than the facts.
If it's race baiting non-sense then why would a kid walking home randomly attack someone?
The facts is that we don't know who instigated it.
You believe that since Zman had injuries the victim must have instigated the attack, it's also possible that the victim was acting in self defense after perceiving the threat of a gun. Both lead to the same injuries and hence the injuries don't prove anything--only that a fight happened.
You then have to then ask "why" the fight happened. To some, it makes sense a black kid randomly attacks someone. To others, it makes sense that a vigilante got cocky. This is what is up for debate.
The only thing not up for debate is that Zman shot a kid who was walking home. The only thing not up for debate is that after being asked by the authorities not to follow the kid, he does so anyway. How do I know? Because if he went back to his car and drove home none of this would have happened. Instead he walked away from his car and ended down the block from the victim's home.
Does it make sense to me that a guy holding a gun who follows someone around ends up shooting someone--yes it does make sense to me. Does it make sense to me that a kid who is almost home would randomly start a fight for no reason? No, it doesn't. But that is what's up for debate.
You're still twisting the words to fit your narrative. He was not asked by the authorities to do anything. He was told it wasn't needed, big difference.
If George was in fact pointing his gun at Trayvon and threatening his life, how could he have retained control over his gun while getting the shit beat out of him? So he was just holding it in his hands pointing it at Trayvon, then he gets knocked on the ground and repeatedly punched while still holding the gun, not pulling the trigger, screaming for help, and finally after 40ish seconds of no help he decides to pull the trigger. Meanwhile all of this time Trayvon is just like "oh man I hope he doesn't shoot me with that gun but I'm gonna keep wailing on his head". That sounds like it makes more sense than George Zimmermans account.
Or maybe he was trying to point the gun at Travyon and Travyon did everything he could to not get shot until the gun finally found its mark.
We still don't know who yelled for help, an expert says it was Travyon, you say it was Zman, hence that is up for debate.
It really doesn't make sense for Martin to attack a man who is pointing a gun at him. Black people do not randomly attack people, but they also don't try to punch people who have a gun.
It is more plausible if Martin didn't realize Zimmerman had a gun. Has it been established in the case that Zimmerman had his gun out when he confronted Martin?
Lots of possibilities actually.
Gun could have been visible, but not in hand. Gun was in hand, but not pointed. Gun was not visible, but Zman looked like he was pulling the gun. All of which could scare Travyon into trying to fight for his life. And if in the 40 seconds Zman just focused on getting the gun out, then Travyon would sustain no injuries except the fatal one.
On May 31 2013 05:55 GwSC wrote: Oh look, it's someone presenting the "This is what happened, if you think otherwise you're a racist" argument, yet again.
I am kind of interested in your viewpoint. Why do you think Martin would attack Zimmerman?
I have no idea. I do not follow all this as closely as some people do. I just would prefer that if people want to make the argument "This is what happened and you're a racist if you think otherwise", they would not try to beat around the bush and instead just say it outright.
Some people think that when a person with a gun follows you for more than a block and ends up shooting you that he is more likely to have instigated a fight.
Others think a kid walking home would instigate a fight.
Of course that doesn't make sense since why would a kid that is walking home randomly start a fight? Oh right, there is one reason why you would think it would make sense why a black kid would randomly start a fight.
If you have other reasons why a kid would randomly start fights on his way home--please enlighten us.
Why does him being black have anything to do with it? Are you racist? How about it's completely plausible that a person who looked like they were doing something wrong (hint: it's not being black) was questioned by someone who was looking out his neighborhood? He was aware of reported break-ins and saw someone he didn't recognize walking behind houses.
Not my picture, the OP's picture. (You did read the OP right?)
And I asked you for a reason why it makes sense a kid would attack someone when he's almost home. Because I can't think of any. I don't think any sane person can think of any. The only type of person who I can see coming to that conclusion is someone who thinks it makes sense black kids randomly attack people.
However, if what you're saying is true, and an armed man starts harassing travyon--then it's really Zman who initiates the fight with his harassment. That I could also see.
This means it could be:
a) Cocky vigilante b) Zman harasses Travyon c) Travyon attacks someone for some reason
Any other possibilities?
You're still making a mistake in attempting to strengthen your argument by attacking the character of anyone who proposes a different version of what happened. A black kid "randomly attacking" someone is far from the only possible explanation. Maybe Zimmerman followed Trayvon, confronted him, Trayvon got angry because of the manner in which he was confronted (or maybe he just had a bad day?) and things got physical? You dismiss this and any other similar possibility by saying that only a racist could believe that Trayvon started the fight and that Zimmerman acted in self defense.
Technically what you're describing is B) Zman harasses Travyon
This would mean that it was Zman who initiated the fight.
On a verbal level perhaps, but do you deny that it is possible that Zman said something that made Martin angry, and that Martin then attacked Zman initiating the physical fight?
In my opinion, if you anger someone enough to get them to fight then you're the one initiating (or goading) it to happen. If someone followed my for more than a block, someone who at one point was running at me, and then somehow catches up and starts harassing me--I would definitely be upset, especially if I was going home. Which definitely fits into the "Zman harasses Travyon" scenario.
EPT![[image loading]](http://bcclist.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-path.jpg?w=510&h=342)
