Case closed, Zimmerman's a gonner

Status
Not open for further replies.
From what Ernie posted GZ should not even have been interviewed by the police for gunning down an innocent, unarmed teenager. :rolleyes:

Did I mention the teenager, deceased teenager, was doing nothing wrong?

And neither did Zimmerman. At some point, Martin attacked Zimmerman. Martin died. Tough shit!

I would feel exactly the same if a white kid attacked a black neighborhood watch coordinator doing his job.
The difference, is you would STILL be on the black guy's side.
 
Jake! I don't know shit about your life outside of USMB. Perhaps you are in a position where you can make accusations and assertions and are not challenged. You asserted that Zimmerman was told to stay in his vehicle. You were challenged. You owe us a quote or and admission of your lie.

But you, dishonest fuck you are, when cornered, accuse others of lying. You can't support that with facts either. What's next. Are you going to call me a racist? I'm waiting with baited breath.

How ARE you going to try to worm your way out of THIS one?

Just out of curiousity, how do you interpret "We don't need you to do that." This is a serious question. Given the overall situation at that time, how do you interpret "We don't need you to do that." What's the fair and honest interpretation of that, which was told to George by the 911 operator.

just as it says we dont need you to do that

zimmerman said ok and stopped as well

however that was said outside of the car

there was not mention by dispatch to

remain in the car

there are 4 requests by dispatch requesting assistance by zimmerman

prior to the we dont need you to do that

this will come into play in court
 
You don't have the right to stand your ground with the police. And merely walking behind someone is not stalking, nor is it a physical assault.

Zimmerman was not the police, nor was he acting for the police, nor was he wearing a badge or uniform of a security guard, ...

I believe there was a lot of running involved as well, not just walking. Maybe I'm wrong about the term stalking, but I thought tracking someone, following them, is what stalking is. Again I'm saying stalking from the perspective of Trayvon... even the dispatcher appears to tell Zimmerman to stop following/stalking that the police are on their way.

Stand your ground applies not just to Zim, but also to Tray. If Tray felt threatened by Zim following him, chasing him, then he had the right to defend himself.

Where did I say any of that? Oh, that's right. I didn't. I was responding to the post about li'l Trayvon hearing Zimmerman call the police. He probably thought he could stop the inevitable by beating the shit out of Zimmerman if he heard the call.

You do NOT have the right to physically assault someone who is just walking behind you. How the hell do you even shop if you assault everyone who is behind you! You sound like you and li'l Trayvon both have single digit IQs.

What's your problem?
 
There is no conclusive evidence his head was bashed on the pavement or his nose was broken.

Except the eye witness and medical reports support Zimmerman's account. Troubling, no?

There is no witness that said Martin was bashing Zimmerman head on the pavement. And Zimmerman refused medical treatment at the scene and never had an x-ray taken of his nose.

in the first frye hearing it was revealed by accident

(however the judge did let in as a question) by defense

that there is a 2nd witness on scene that

says it was zimmerman screaming for help
 
Zimmerman was not the police, nor was he acting for the police, nor was he wearing a badge or uniform of a security guard, ...

I believe there was a lot of running involved as well, not just walking. Maybe I'm wrong about the term stalking, but I thought tracking someone, following them, is what stalking is. Again I'm saying stalking from the perspective of Trayvon... even the dispatcher appears to tell Zimmerman to stop following/stalking that the police are on their way.

Stand your ground applies not just to Zim, but also to Tray. If Tray felt threatened by Zim following him, chasing him, then he had the right to defend himself.

Where did I say any of that? Oh, that's right. I didn't. I was responding to the post about li'l Trayvon hearing Zimmerman call the police. He probably thought he could stop the inevitable by beating the shit out of Zimmerman if he heard the call.

You do NOT have the right to physically assault someone who is just walking behind you. How the hell do you even shop if you assault everyone who is behind you! You sound like you and li'l Trayvon both have single digit IQs.

What's your problem?

Stand your ground applies not just to Zim

actually Stand you ground does not apply to zimmerman in this case

it is classic self defense
 
From what Ernie posted GZ should not even have been interviewed by the police for gunning down an innocent, unarmed teenager. :rolleyes:

Did I mention the teenager, deceased teenager, was doing nothing wrong?
Nothing except trying to kill somebody.
 
Where did I say any of that? Oh, that's right. I didn't. I was responding to the post about li'l Trayvon hearing Zimmerman call the police. He probably thought he could stop the inevitable by beating the shit out of Zimmerman if he heard the call.

You do NOT have the right to physically assault someone who is just walking behind you. How the hell do you even shop if you assault everyone who is behind you! You sound like you and li'l Trayvon both have single digit IQs.

What's your problem?

Stand your ground applies not just to Zim

actually Stand you ground does not apply to zimmerman in this case

it is classic self defense

Not sure what classic self defense is... here is the relative portion of florida statute:

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; ...


So then the question will be whether or not killing Trayvon was necessary to prevent Zimmerman's imminent death or great bodily harm.
 
Except the eye witness and medical reports support Zimmerman's account. Troubling, no?

There is no witness that said Martin was bashing Zimmerman head on the pavement. And Zimmerman refused medical treatment at the scene and never had an x-ray taken of his nose.

Google "witness 6"

We would need a new thread to talk about everything wrong with witness 6 interview. But I didn't hear anything about bashing someones head in the ground.
 
Jake! I don't know shit about your life outside of USMB. Perhaps you are in a position where you can make accusations and assertions and are not challenged. You asserted that Zimmerman was told to stay in his vehicle. You were challenged. You owe us a quote or and admission of your lie.

But you, dishonest fuck you are, when cornered, accuse others of lying. You can't support that with facts either. What's next. Are you going to call me a racist? I'm waiting with baited breath.

How ARE you going to try to worm your way out of THIS one?

Just out of curiousity, how do you interpret "We don't need you to do that." This is a serious question. Given the overall situation at that time, how do you interpret "We don't need you to do that." What's the fair and honest interpretation of that, which was told to George by the 911 operator.
zimmerman said ok and stopped as well

however that was said outside of the car

just as it says we dont need you to do that

there was not mention by dispatch to

remain in the car

there are 4 requests by dispatch requesting assistance by zimmerman

prior to the we dont need you to do that

this will come into play in court

No, he didn't stop after the 911 operator told him "We don't need you to do that." He continued to follow Trayvon and was even running after him after he was told "We don't need you to do that."
 
Just out of curiousity, how do you interpret "We don't need you to do that." This is a serious question. Given the overall situation at that time, how do you interpret "We don't need you to do that." What's the fair and honest interpretation of that, which was told to George by the 911 operator.
zimmerman said ok and stopped as well

however that was said outside of the car

just as it says we dont need you to do that

there was not mention by dispatch to

remain in the car

there are 4 requests by dispatch requesting assistance by zimmerman

prior to the we dont need you to do that

this will come into play in court

No, he didn't stop after the 911 operator told him "We don't need you to do that." He continued to follow Trayvon and was even running after him after he was told "We don't need you to do that."

post the evidence of that
 
There is no conclusive evidence his head was bashed on the pavement or his nose was broken.

Except the eye witness and medical reports support Zimmerman's account. Troubling, no?

There is no witness that said Martin was bashing Zimmerman head on the pavement. And Zimmerman refused medical treatment at the scene and never had an x-ray taken of his nose.

And this is very important. He was not seriously harmed. Yet the Florida statute that applies to this situation says you have to be in imminent fear of your life or "great" bodily harm in order to use deadly force. It does not appear there was either.

At the same time, people keep saying Trayvon had no right to attack, if he did, someone who was just following him. However, according to the same statute, which is in a post a few posts above this one, according to the Florida statute, if you feal threatened and think somone is going to attack you or commit a felony on you or someone else or on property, you have the right to use force to stop them. Not deadly force, but force. Trayvon could very well have felt threatened because someone was following him, running after him even. He had every right to turn on that person and use force to stop him and disable him in order to prevent an attack on himself.

As well, witness no. 6 said he could not tell who was yelling 'help.' He just assumed it was the guy on the bottom of the two men who were 'wrestling' on the ground, but he actually couldn't tell.

Also, Trayvon's body was several feet away from the concrete path and face down. Had he been on top of Zimmerman 'pounding his head against the concrete' when Zimmerman shot him, as he was shot directly in the chest, there would have been his blood on Zimmerman, and when Zimmerman pushed him off, he would have been on the concrete or right next to it and probably on his back. Zimmerman could not have shot him when they were wrestling on the path.
 
Last edited:
zimmerman said ok and stopped as well

however that was said outside of the car

just as it says we dont need you to do that

there was not mention by dispatch to

remain in the car

there are 4 requests by dispatch requesting assistance by zimmerman

prior to the we dont need you to do that

this will come into play in court

No, he didn't stop after the 911 operator told him "We don't need you to do that." He continued to follow Trayvon and was even running after him after he was told "We don't need you to do that."

post the evidence of that

It's on the 911 call. Listen to the 911 call.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top