George Zimmerman's bloody head

[Toddsterpatriot]

Oh I see so following and then running after someone is not chasing or running... Get a clue

There really is no evidence, much less "proof," that Zimmerman "ran."

But, let's not quibble.

Let's pretend that the proof is there.

Ok.

So, in following a guy he found suspicious who was getting away -- after the neighborhood watch guy had called the police about him -- Zimmerman chose to "run."

And?

In your twisted little mind, does this justify Martin turning around on Zimmerman and attacking him (if Zimmerman didn't touch Martin first)?

I'm pretty sure you aren't going to try to claim that there's ANY evidence that Zimmerman touched Martin before Martin struck Zimmerman. Are you?

Did you realize that being followed (even by a guy who is "running") is NOT a crime and does not constitute an "attack?"

If your scenario is true, and if Martin felt Zimmerman was a threat, yes, under SYG, Martin would be justified in doing so.

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.

Was Trayvon under the impression that Martin's questions were unlawful force?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Or you get tired of being chased and you stand your ground not knowing your stalker had a concealed weapon. Remember, Trayvon was just a kid.

Standing your ground doesn't mean you can start beating someone's head on the sidewalk.

It is if Zimmerman attacked first. You don't know if he did or didn't. And you still haven't explained why it's OK to stalk someone. Don't you know how scary that is?

You bet, if Zimmermann attacked first, that changes everything.

Stalk? Perhaps you should post the legal definition?

 

[Peach]

Facial injuries? I have seen worse from 1) shaving cuts. And the blood from the boos boos on his head were visible, because he had a skinhead haircut. 2) Be realistic, the killer wasn't injured enough to need more than a once over from the EMTs. What Martin may have said might matter, just as the victim didn't know an armed and ready to kill man was prowling his father's neighborhood, we don't know what Martin said. For the newly immigrated to America, criminal defendants often"shade" events in their favor.....SURPRISE!

1) I would suggest using a moisturizing shave cream, in addition to actual moisturizing lotion after shaving, so as to not cut yourself while shaving.

2) Let's not forget that Zimmerman was seen by a Doctor the next day.

3) Your words that I have bolded indicate a racist undertone.

Respectfully,
~Belle

Not intended, Zimmerman's hair is always very short n the photos I have seen; I'll change "shade" to "emphasize". When someone's hair is so closely shaved, any bruise or scrape will be visible.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Facial injuries? I have seen worse from shaving cuts. And the blood from the boos boos on his head were visible, because he had a skinhead haircut. Be realistic, the killer wasn't injured enough to need more than a once over from the EMTs. What Martin may have said might matter, just as the victim didn't know an armed and ready to kill man was prowling his father's neighborhood, we don't know what Martin said. For the newly immigrated to America, criminal defendants often "shade" events in their favor.....SURPRISE!

You don't have to wait until you've been beaten to death before you can defend yourself.

The legally armed man didn't know a young felony assaulter was prowling his neighborhood.

Say it was one of your sons being stalked. What would you tell him to do?

I'd probably ask my son, "why was he casing the houses between the store and home"?

And then I'd ask, "once you lost the stalker, why did you go back and hit him"?

 

[Katzndogz]

Once Zimmerman abadoned his surveillance and went back to his car, Martin's right was to continue on going home. Trayvon Lives. Trayvon decides to administer some hood justice, Trayvon Dies.

 

[BDBoop]

You don't have to wait until you've been beaten to death before you can defend yourself.

The legally armed man didn't know a young felony assaulter was prowling his neighborhood.

Say it was one of your sons being stalked. What would you tell him to do?

I'd probably ask my son, "why was he casing the houses between the store and home"?

And then I'd ask, "once you lost the stalker, why did you go back and hit him"?

So, obviously you're not a parent.

Because the first think I'd say is "Are you okay?" followed by "Is the door locked" and "call 911."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Actually Trayson was on the phone so we know what he was doing, he was walking and saw some one following him so he walked faster then the guy kept following him so he began to run then the phone drops and the end result is Trayson dead.
If your being stalked and you try to get away and you can't what do you do and when you do it what is it?

If your being stalked and you try to get away and you can't

Zimmermann lost track of him. Trayvon had already gotten away.

what do you do

Apparently, you circle back, assault the guy legally following you and catch a bullet.
what do you do

Yes because what a racist stalker who killed someone who is facing possibly death penalty says is 100% true but what the recorded evidence and witness say is totally bogus. Jesus.

Stalker? What's that?

 

[Peach]

You don't have to wait until you've been beaten to death before you can defend yourself.

The legally armed man didn't know a young felony assaulter was prowling his neighborhood.

Say it was one of your sons being stalked. What would you tell him to do?

I'd probably ask my son, "why was he casing the houses between the store and home"?

And then I'd ask, "once you lost the stalker, why did you go back and hit him"?

"casing the houses", from what source is that conclusion derived?

 

[Liability]

There really is no evidence, much less "proof," that Zimmerman "ran."

But, let's not quibble.

Let's pretend that the proof is there.

Ok.

So, in following a guy he found suspicious who was getting away -- after the neighborhood watch guy had called the police about him -- Zimmerman chose to "run."

And?

In your twisted little mind, does this justify Martin turning around on Zimmerman and attacking him (if Zimmerman didn't touch Martin first)?

I'm pretty sure you aren't going to try to claim that there's ANY evidence that Zimmerman touched Martin before Martin struck Zimmerman. Are you?

Did you realize that being followed (even by a guy who is "running") is NOT a crime and does not constitute an "attack?"

If your scenario is true, and if Martin felt Zimmerman was a threat, yes, under SYG, Martin would be justified in doing so.

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.

Was Trayvon under the impression that Martin's questions were unlawful force?

Since we have no evidence that Zimmerman DID anything other than follow ("run after"??) Trayvon, we are confronted with NO WAY of knowing what it was that (allegedly) persuaded Trayvon to assault Zimmerman. (Frankly, we don't know who initiated the physical altercation, for that matter.)

IF all that Zimmerman did was follow Martin to keep an eye on him (in order to point him out when the police whom Zimmerman had already called got there), then it would be flatly correct to say that Zimmerman did nothing illegal at all. Under such circumstances, Trayvon would have zero lawful right to strike Zimmerman.

And here's the thing. I'm not claiming that Zimmerman is innocent. I AM claiming that given what we know and what we don't know, there is no honest, valid BASIS to say that he did ANYTHING illegal, either.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes. It is. You might want to read it before you make yourself look any more foolish.

Trayvon could have walked the other direction.
He chose to confront instead... that's is not 'standing your ground'. That's going on the offense.

Had Zimmerman confronted Trayvon, then you would be correct.

Jesus plz stop making shit up. You have 0 evidence that Trayvon confronted Zimmerman infact you have a phone call that shows that Trayvon was trying to run away but couldnt
Come back and join the discussion when you’ve actually reads something about it.

Trayvon was trying to run away but couldnt

Couldn't? Please explain further.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Except there is no evidence that shows Zimmerman is innocent. Its hard to believe in something that isnt' really unless of course you're Cecilie.
I'm pretty sure that being on a phone and hearing the whole thing happen as it occurred isn't hearsay but then again I know what hearsay means.

In the world of Starcrap, where the ONLY evidence in this case is the hearsay of a woman who claims to be Trayvon's girlfriend (Yeah, no motivation to lie THERE), then no, there's no evidence that Zimmerman is innocent.

In the world of REAL human beings with functioning brains, there's ALL KINDS of evidence that Zimmerman is innocent, which would be why the State Attorney's office declined to charge him until liberal idiots who are only marginally more intelligent than Starcrap - because, after all, my dog's turds are smarter than Starcrap - whipped up a racial witch hunt.

You know what hearsay means, do you? Then why don't you explain to us how Martin's girlfriend's testimony doesn't qualify as hearsay? I could use a good laugh, and I really don't want you posting any pictures of yourself naked, so we'll go with another lame-ass attempt to explain why you're not a drooling mouthbreather.

Lay it on us.

Are you stupid? Seriously if you think hearing the situation as it happen is hearsay you are either illiterate or a hack whose taken a side and found that he was wrong and is now defending a potential murdered because he is too afraid to admit he was wrong

In other words, you can't explain it, because you have no fucking clue what hearsay is.

Consider yourself my charitable deed for the day, you illiterate pile of pig feces.

SHE knows what was and wasn't said. WE don't know. All we have is her word for it, with no way to prove or disprove whether she's telling the truth. That would be hearsay.

Furthermore, she's less than believable, since her account doesn't coincide with the timeline as laid out by other witnesses AND the phone calls we actually CAN verify, ie. the ones to the cops (like the one Trayvon Martin SHOULD have made, and didn't).

Fucktard.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Say it was one of your sons being stalked. What would you tell him to do?

I'd probably ask my son, "why was he casing the houses between the store and home"?

And then I'd ask, "once you lost the stalker, why did you go back and hit him"?

So, obviously you're not a parent.

Because the first think I'd say is "Are you okay?" followed by "Is the door locked" and "call 911."

My son would have already used his phone to call 911.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So following someone and then running after them with a gun after being told by the cops and the end result is a dead person isn't wrong. Seriously? Seriously?

Did he do that? Do you have any evidence of that?

Yea the fucking recording and phone call. Of which has been mention 100 times so either you are too lazy to read or you are choosing to ignore evidence.

And what recording of Zimmerman "running after Martin" do you have?

Also, shitforbrains, "a dead person" does not automatically mean anyone committed a crime, no matter how much you want to keep parroting that.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Say it was one of your sons being stalked. What would you tell him to do?

I'd probably ask my son, "why was he casing the houses between the store and home"?

And then I'd ask, "once you lost the stalker, why did you go back and hit him"?

"casing the houses", from what source is that conclusion derived?

From Zimmermann.
From the time it took Trayvon to get from the store to the site of the confrontation.

 

[Liability]

If your scenario is true, and if Martin felt Zimmerman was a threat, yes, under SYG, Martin would be justified in doing so.

Wrong. He would simply be under no lawful duty to "retreat" prior to defending himself. But he would STILL have to be actually under some direct attack of legitimate and reasonably consider himself to be under immediate threat BEFORE he could lawfully resort to physical force himself.

The TWO statutes which combined spell it out are: and



And I don't think these statutes apply to him under any circumstances. It is not claimed that he has a defense to charges. There are no charges. He's dead. The QUESTION is whether (or not) Trayvon was permitted by Florida Law to use FORCE (not even deadly force) to protect himself.

To answer that we'd all need a lot more information than any of us have.

But even if the statute were applicable to him , before he could rely on it, it would have to be a REASONABLE belief by him, under all the circumstances, that his use of force was reasonably necessary. That is he would have had to "reasonably believe[] that such conduct [was] necessary to defend himself . . . against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force." And he would have no duty to retreat IF but ONLY IF he REASONABLY perceived a threat of imminent deadly physical force or great bodily harm against him.

Once again, nobody alive today (except Zimmerman) can say what those "circumstances" were. SO nobody can say that Trayvon had ANY knowledge of Zimmerman's gun. Nobody can say, for instance, tha the gun had ever been pulled or exposed before the moment it got used. Nobody can therefore say that the circumstances were such that Trayvon had any reasonable reason to fear any physical attack (however minor), much less the threat of great bodily harm or death. Thus, NOBODY can say Trayvon could have invoked the justification law of Florida.

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.

If someone twice my build was following me, in a place where I was allowed to be, I could reasonably believe that the person meant me harm and defend myself.

That is basically SYG in a nutshell. The problem with the law that the word "reasonably" is subjective.

No. It that absolutely is NOT what the so-called "stand your ground" law is -- not in a nutshell and not at all.

But yes, the "test" does involve the subjective one of "reasonableness." That becomes a jury question -- the determination of which is founded upon the EVIDENCE.

Since we do not HAVE actual evidence -- even if the justification law were applicable as to Trayvon -- we could not render any valid conclusion as to the "reasonableness" of his alleged "belief."

 

[Cecilie1200]

Facial injuries? I have seen worse from shaving cuts. And the blood from the boos boos on his head were visible, because he had a skinhead haircut. Be realistic, the killer wasn't injured enough to need more than a once over from the EMTs. What Martin may have said might matter, just as the victim didn't know an armed and ready to kill man was prowling his father's neighborhood, we don't know what Martin said. For the newly immigrated to America, criminal defendants often "shade" events in their favor.....SURPRISE!

I actually have no trouble believing that a stupid bitch like you knows people who give themselves closed fractures of the nose while shaving. Idiots tend to stick together in herds, so I'm told.

I referenced the photo & the fact he was not forced to be taken to a hospital. I agree with Annie at this point, all is conjecture until the case continues. I see no serious injuries the killer sustained, and the lack of medial care remains an outstanding question. As you indicate he sustained a "closed fracture", I gather you are in possession of his medial records.

The paramedics don't "force" anyone to go to the hospital, you imbecile. Zimmerman declined to go to the hospital, which is certainly his right to do, and went to his own doctor the next day, ALSO his right to do.

Why don't you try referencing the actual fucking medical reports? Too much reading? "His pictures look to me like he just had a scratch on his nose." Never mind the fact that HIS DOCTOR - you know, a REAL doctor, as opposed to stupid twats like you who just play doctors on the Internet - says he had a closed fracture, or the fact that internal injuries (you know, like to bones and shit) often don't show much externally.

Let me just say once more, because I know you're too big of a dimwit to have picked it up the first six or seven times: no one gives a fuck what YOU see. You don't know your ass from your elbow, so why would we expect you to know a fractured nose in a photograph?

Last thing: why would you have to "gather" that I'm "in possession of the medical records", sow? The report has been released to the media, so anyone who can read - ie. not you - is perfectly capable of knowing that his doctor diagnosed him with a closed fracture. Here, let me reference you the news story, so that you can have someone intelligent - assumimg any such person would associate with you - read it for you.

George Zimmerman Medical Report Sheds Light on Injuries After Trayvon Martin Shooting - ABC News

Sources: Report Says Zimmerman Had Broken Nose, Other Injuries After Fight | FOX8.com

George Zimmerman had a broken nose, two cuts and two black eyes: ABC News report - Trayvon Martin - MiamiHerald.com

Pick your news site and your story, dumbass. I can reference even more of them for you, if those don't suit or if you want to continue your bravura performance as an uninformed, blithering halfwit.

Have I ever mentioned that every time I read a line in a historical novel about "Women's brains are too delicate to handle education and heavy thought", I immediately picture you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

"Felony assaulter." You'll need to prove that assertion.

YOU demanding proof of an assertion is just about the funniest thing I've seen today. I knew you were a hypocritical imbecile, but you must actually be taking lessons and practicing at it.

Well, if you insist. It is kind of a slow day today. And lord knows you could use some sweetening up.

Original Recipe Yield 3 -1/2 dozen
Ingredients

1 (16 ounce) package OREO Chocolate Sandwich Cookies, divided
1 (8 ounce) package PHILADELPHIA Cream Cheese, softened
2 (8 ounce) packages BAKER'S Semi-Sweet Baking Chocolate, melted
Directions

Crush 9 of the cookies to fine crumbs in food processor; reserve for later use. (Cookies can also be finely crushed in a resealable plastic bag using a rolling pin.) Crush remaining 36 cookies to fine crumbs; place in medium bowl. Add cream cheese; mix until well blended. Roll cookie mixture into 42 balls, about 1-inch in diameter.
Dip balls in chocolate; place on wax paper-covered baking sheet. (Any leftover chocolate can be stored at room temperature for another use.) Sprinkle with reserved cookie crumbs.

Refrigerate until firm, about 1 hour. Store leftover truffles, covered, in refrigerator.
Footnotes

How to How to Easily Dip Truffles

Place truffle ball in melted chocolate to coat; roll if necessary. Lift truffle from chocolate using 2 forks (this will allow excess chocolate to run off) before placing on wax paper.

I didn't know it was possible for you to babble any more than you normally do, but I now stand corrected.

 

[BDBoop]

I didn't know it was possible for you to babble any more than you normally do, but I now stand corrected.

I get attacked, I post recipes. Very simple cause and effect. You stay on topic, so do I. You get bitchy, I post recipes. And since you appear to be mentally ill, undiagnosed and untreated, compounded by PMS during the full moon, I need lots of recipes.

Or you can just back the fuck off.

Red Flannel Hash

Ingredients
1 medium onion, chopped
2 tablespoons vegetable oil
1 (12-ounce) can SPAM® Classic, diced
4 medium potatoes, cooked and diced
1 (16-ounce) can beets, drained and diced
Pepper, to taste

1In large skillet, sauté onion in oil, stirring frequently, until lightly browned. Add SPAM® Classic and potatoes; sauté, stirring frequently, 5 minutes. Sprinkle with pepper. Add beets; stir to mix. Cover; reduce heat to low. Cook 10 minutes longer. Uncover; cook 5 minutes more.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'd probably ask my son, "why was he casing the houses between the store and home"?

And then I'd ask, "once you lost the stalker, why did you go back and hit him"?

"casing the houses", from what source is that conclusion derived?

From Zimmermann.
From the time it took Trayvon to get from the store to the site of the confrontation.

In all fairness, I doubt he was casing the houses. I don't doubt that's probably what it looked like to Zimmerman, but I have no trouble believing he was just taking a slow walk and looking around an unfamiliar neighborhood (since, of course, he WAS only visiting and may never have been there before). It's a little strange in the rain, I'll grant you, but some people like rain.

 

[Peach]

I'd probably ask my son, "why was he casing the houses between the store and home"?

And then I'd ask, "once you lost the stalker, why did you go back and hit him"?

"casing the houses", from what source is that conclusion derived?

From Zimmermann.
From the time it took Trayvon to get from the store to the site of the confrontation.

Thank you, obviously Zimmerman says what will assist in his defense. The reported phone calls the victim made, IF true, explain the time frame. He was hiding at one point, trying to evade Zimmerman. I read the recent statement by the victim's friend that he was yelling "get off, get off". The defendant will dispute that of course. Again, if Zimmerman was seriously injured, he would have been forced to go a hospital; no photos posted here show more than minor lacerations.