George Zimmerman's bloody head

[Ariux]

How about you try that, and come back and tell us how successful you are at being able to shout for help at the top of your lungs as Zimmerman claims he did, as heard on the 911 tapes. Also tell us how successful you are at pulling out a gun that is tucked into your waist, right where an assailant who is on top of you would be sitting. Please, oh please, conduct this experiment and come back to us, so that you can tell us for yourself just how full of shit you are.

Trayvon was bigger than Zimmerman, and all the physical evidence shows that Trayvon was doing all the pounding and Zimmerman doing all the receiving, yet you imply that you don't believe it was Zimmerman doing the squealing. You are so f-ing incredibly stupid.

As for the experiment you propose, let's you and I do it. I'll lay down and you get on top of me and we'll see if you can prevent me from blowing a hole in your chest, using a gun from my waistband.

How the fuck is it that you haven't killed yourself already, through incredible stupidity? Are you kept in a rubber room?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The thing is this, George Zimmerman did everything wrong. He was operating outside of what is outlined in his neighborhood watch guidelines, he was operating outside the of what he would have been taught by who ever provided his required training to obtain a CCW in Florida. Did he set out to shoot some one that night ? no, probably not, but his not so smart actions that night led to a shooting. That will be pointed out in court, and those very things are what you are warned about (other then civil litigation) in a CCW class. The stupidity started on Zimmermans end of this, and Martins was the catalyst that blew it all up, but in the end, its on Zimmermans head.

He was operating outside of what is outlined in his neighborhood watch guidelines,

I didn't think he was on duty when he saw Trayvon.

Maybe not. Didn't he say he was neighborhood watch on the 911 call? Even so, his actions were contrary to what he would have been taught by a CCW instructor. Not saying he is the evil klan member the media attempted to make him out to be. Just a guy who made a very bad decision.

My God, you're pontificating about this, and you haven't even bothered to listen to Zimmerman's police call (which was NOT to 911)? What could you POSSIBLY think you have to say that's of any value to anyone?

 

[candycorn]

Zimmerman had injuries consistent with HIS account. IF the bullshit tripe being spewed by morons like you had any validity to it, there should not be such significant corroboration from the evidence.

This is the problem, and that you claim to be a lawyer and don't get this is pathetic.....Zimmerman's injuries are "consistent" with his story just as much as they are consistent with him being the aggressor.

Wrong, inthemuddle. Once again, you prove yourself to be just plain stupid.

Zimmerman's injuries are consistent with HIS account, but they are NOT consistent with him being the alleged aggressor. And there is no evidence that he was the aggressor, either, you imbecile.

It's amazing that a person of your intellectual capacity can even swallow.

Sure there is evidence; he got out of his car against police advice. That can be seen as aggression right there.

Where I come down in the case is that the unarmed guy is dead, the armed guy was in no danger and was only in perceived danger because he put himself into perceived danger against the advice of the police.

 

[Liability]

This is the problem, and that you claim to be a lawyer and don't get this is pathetic.....Zimmerman's injuries are "consistent" with his story just as much as they are consistent with him being the aggressor.

Wrong, inthemuddle. Once again, you prove yourself to be just plain stupid.

Zimmerman's injuries are consistent with HIS account, but they are NOT consistent with him being the alleged aggressor. And there is no evidence that he was the aggressor, either, you imbecile.

It's amazing that a person of your intellectual capacity can even swallow.

Sure there is evidence; he got out of his car against police advice. That can be seen as aggression right there.

Where I come down in the case is that the unarmed guy is dead, the armed guy was in no danger and was only in perceived danger because he put himself into perceived danger against the advice of the police.

Wrong.

The comment made by the police dispatcher was that Zimmerman didn't "HAVE to." That doesn't mean he wasn't permitted to. He WAS permitted to . Welcome to America. And no, what Zimmerman did (as far as we know) cannot validly or logically be seen as "aggression." That's ridiculous on its face.

And, no. The guy who survived didn't "put himself" into danger. He apparently was behaving in a perfectly legal fashion when the dead guy took exception to it. Ok. Take exception, but keep your hands to yourself. It APPEARS that the dead guy didn't. His mistake. That doesn't make the survivor a criminal.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This is the problem, and that you claim to be a lawyer and don't get this is pathetic.....Zimmerman's injuries are "consistent" with his story just as much as they are consistent with him being the aggressor.

Wrong, inthemuddle. Once again, you prove yourself to be just plain stupid.

Zimmerman's injuries are consistent with HIS account, but they are NOT consistent with him being the alleged aggressor. And there is no evidence that he was the aggressor, either, you imbecile.

It's amazing that a person of your intellectual capacity can even swallow.

Sure there is evidence; he got out of his car against police advice. That can be seen as aggression right there.

Where I come down in the case is that the unarmed guy is dead, the armed guy was in no danger and was only in perceived danger because he put himself into perceived danger against the advice of the police.

the armed guy was in no danger

You're right, because getting your head bashed into concrete isn't dangerous.
Happens to you all the time, and you're okay.

 

[WorldWatcher]

And, no. The guy who survived didn't "put himself" into danger. He apparently was behaving in a perfectly legal fashion when the dead guy took exception to it. Ok. Take exception, but keep your hands to yourself. It APPEARS that the dead guy didn't. His mistake. That doesn't make the survivor a criminal.

Liability,

I know you left yourself an out with "APPEARS" and "apparently", but have you seen any evidence of actually who started the hostilities?



>>>>

 

[Liability]

And, no. The guy who survived didn't "put himself" into danger. He apparently was behaving in a perfectly legal fashion when the dead guy took exception to it. Ok. Take exception, but keep your hands to yourself. It APPEARS that the dead guy didn't. His mistake. That doesn't make the survivor a criminal.

Liability,

I know you left yourself an out with "APPEARS" and "apparently", but have you seen any evidence of actually who started the hostilities?



>>>>

I did leave myself outs because (like the rest of "us") I have not seen all of the evidence. This is why my watchword has been "wait."

I am willing to speculate, to a minor extent, though, based on what is known so far:

The only mark on Trayvon Martin (other than the bullet wound, sadly enough) is a single scrape on one knuckle. It would thus appear that Trayvon must not have been on the receiving end of any fight. The same cannot be said of Zimmerman's physical condition.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Oookay.

Lol, hide behind ad hominem, coward, but you cant face the simple fact that my summary is EXACTLY WHAT YOU LIBTARDS ARE DEMANDING OF US.

If you cant use lethal force when a thug is pounding your brains out then you in effect HAVE NO RIGHT to self defense.

You fucking communists simply plan to control all the thugs.

I got news for you shit-head; it aint gonna work. The only reason the thugs are around is because the feds hold the rest of us back. If the government would get the hell out of our way we would put the godamned thugs where they belong.

You sound like a thug. An emotional thug.

And you only applaud the physical kind, is that it?

 

[WorldWatcher]

And, no. The guy who survived didn't "put himself" into danger. He apparently was behaving in a perfectly legal fashion when the dead guy took exception to it. Ok. Take exception, but keep your hands to yourself. It APPEARS that the dead guy didn't. His mistake. That doesn't make the survivor a criminal.

Liability,

I know you left yourself an out with "APPEARS" and "apparently", but have you seen any evidence of actually who started the hostilities?



>>>>

I did leave myself outs because (like the rest of "us") I have not seen all of the evidence. This is why my watchword has been "wait."

I am willing to speculate, to a minor extent, though, based on what is known so far:

The only mark on Trayvon Martin (other than the bullet wound, sadly enough) is a single scrape on one knuckle. It would thus appear that Trayvon must not have been on the receiving end of any fight. The same cannot be said of Zimmerman's physical condition.

Actually the autopsy report says the small abrasion was on the left ring finger, not the knuckle.

But I agree, we have seen for months that Martin was "bashing Zimmerman's face in" and one report (since retracted) that it was "MMA" style. Seems odd though that someone pounding in the face of another with repeated blows would have: (a) no damage to their knuckles, and (b) the recipient would have very little damage to their face. What damage there was being consistent with a single good shot to the face.



>>>>

 

[Cecilie1200]

Your convoluted logic would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.

First you save evidence is irrelevent, then you present your supposition and conjecture as to why anything that doesn't corroborate Zimmerman's story is irrelevent because EVIDENCE that does support his story is the ONLY evidence that should be considered viable.

So the Zimmerman Zombie's new spin is that evidence of a struggle PROVES Zimmerman correct....FORGET any evidence to indicate just HOW that struggle came to be, and to whom was the initial instigator.

Like I said before, some creep stalks you while you're walking HOME, and you're not going to fight for you life when he comes up on you?

My logic is not the convoluted logic, dumb ass.

I have NEVER said that evidence is irrelevant.

I did suggest that the thread you praised is not worth much.

Zimmerman had injuries consistent with HIS account. IF the bullshit tripe being spewed by morons like you had any validity to it, there should not be such significant corroboration from the evidence.

There is also no evidence of "stalking." It's a nice buzz word, but not a valid word choice in this discussion.

Your argument (like you) is still just an empty bit of fluff. Call yourself and your contentions a "fail" and move on.

Your rancid, biased, mindless conjecture is worthless.

He was not stalking the kid. And I dont think a confrontation was on his mind at all. He was not a beered up red neck out looking for a colored folk to airhole either, BUT, his actions put him in the spot that he had to shoot himself out of. Its even in the evidence that the shooting was avoidable by Zimmerman had he just waited for the police. That is why Zimmerman was charged. There is no law that protects what he did. First rule of concealed carry, be where the trouble is not.

What's in the evidence is that some dipshit cop with 20/20 hindsight felt the need to state a blindingly obvious - and ultimately meaningless - tautology to put himself on the correct, PC side of the debate so the screeching, slavering racist wolves out there don't bite him in the ass. "If he'd just not been there, nothing would have happened." Well, so what? What the fuck difference does that make? If Martin hadn't been there, nothing would have happened. If Martin hadn't gone to the store, or had gone to stay with someone else during his suspension, or Zimmerman had bought a house in a different neighborhood, if, if, if . . . none of this would have happened. But since none of those things were criminal acts, or even BAD acts in and of themselves - including Zimmerman getting out of his truck to see where Martin had gone - talking about how they could have been made differently is an empty waste of time and breath, serving no purpose whatsoever except to cover the speaker's ass when the race-baiters and ignoramuses come hunting for heads.

 

[Liability]

Liability,

I know you left yourself an out with "APPEARS" and "apparently", but have you seen any evidence of actually who started the hostilities?



>>>>

I did leave myself outs because (like the rest of "us") I have not seen all of the evidence. This is why my watchword has been "wait."

I am willing to speculate, to a minor extent, though, based on what is known so far:

The only mark on Trayvon Martin (other than the bullet wound, sadly enough) is a single scrape on one knuckle. It would thus appear that Trayvon must not have been on the receiving end of any fight. The same cannot be said of Zimmerman's physical condition.

Actually the autopsy report says the small abrasion was on the left ring finger, not the knuckle.

But I agree, we have seen for months that Martin was "bashing Zimmerman's face in" and one report (since retracted) that it was "MMA" style. Seems odd though that someone pounding in the face of another with repeated blows would have: (a) no damage to their knuckles, and (b) the recipient would have very little damage to their face. What damage there was being consistent with a single good shot to the face.



>>>>

I couldn't give a shit where on Martin's finger the one abrasion was. The lack of other signs of injury STILL suggest that HE was not the one on the receiving end of any assault.

The various signs of injury on Zimmerman suggest that HE had taken some kind of a beating. Minor scrapes on face, forehead, nose. BUT, the more significant signs of injury on the back of his head. They suggest that maybe he did have his cracked against the sidewalk -- more than once. AND, lest we forget, the busted nose. Yeah. It does add up to a pretty convincing showing that HE, not Trayvon, took the beating.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Just so I get this straight...if Martin had had a gun, and simply shot Zimmerman, then he would have been allowed to go free under the Stand Your Ground law and no more would have been said about it.
But, if he doesn't have a gun, and beats up on Zimmerman he is the master of his own fate, deserves to be shot and suffer criticism for his actions.

Is that right?

He'd be where Zimmerman is now, trying to make a case for self-defense out of the existing evidence. And likely having a worse time of it.

 

[Ariux]

Sure there is evidence; he got out of his car against police advice. That can be seen as aggression right there.

That advice was for his own safety, shit-for-brains liberal.

Where I come down in the case is that the unarmed guy is dead, the armed guy was in no danger and was only in perceived danger because he put himself into perceived danger against the advice of the police.

Being on the ground with thug pounding your face is only a perceived danger? Even though you have a ball of shit in your skull for brains, it's a small ball of shit.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is the problem, and that you claim to be a lawyer and don't get this is pathetic.....Zimmerman's injuries are "consistent" with his story just as much as they are consistent with him being the aggressor.

Wrong, inthemuddle. Once again, you prove yourself to be just plain stupid.

Zimmerman's injuries are consistent with HIS account, but they are NOT consistent with him being the alleged aggressor. And there is no evidence that he was the aggressor, either, you imbecile.

It's amazing that a person of your intellectual capacity can even swallow.

Sure there is evidence; he got out of his car against police advice. That can be seen as aggression right there.

Where I come down in the case is that the unarmed guy is dead, the armed guy was in no danger and was only in perceived danger because he put himself into perceived danger against the advice of the police.

The police did not advise him not to get out of the car, so spare us the misinformation. Either you don't know what you're talking about, or you're a liar. Whichever, you have nothing to say that anyone needs to hear.

I sincerely doubt you know jack OR shit about how the law works "where you come from", so you can spare us THAT, too.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Liability,

I know you left yourself an out with "APPEARS" and "apparently", but have you seen any evidence of actually who started the hostilities?



>>>>

I did leave myself outs because (like the rest of "us") I have not seen all of the evidence. This is why my watchword has been "wait."

I am willing to speculate, to a minor extent, though, based on what is known so far:

The only mark on Trayvon Martin (other than the bullet wound, sadly enough) is a single scrape on one knuckle. It would thus appear that Trayvon must not have been on the receiving end of any fight. The same cannot be said of Zimmerman's physical condition.

Actually the autopsy report says the small abrasion was on the left ring finger, not the knuckle.

But I agree, we have seen for months that Martin was "bashing Zimmerman's face in" and one report (since retracted) that it was "MMA" style. Seems odd though that someone pounding in the face of another with repeated blows would have: (a) no damage to their knuckles, and (b) the recipient would have very little damage to their face. What damage there was being consistent with a single good shot to the face.



>>>>

ACTUALLY, it DOES say the knuckle.

 

[KissMy]

No jury is going to say Zimmermans head could have taken a few more hits before he had to use his weapon to defend his life from a crazed drug adict who would not stop trying to kill a subdued person screaming for his life.

These videos below shows a couple dudes heads hit concrete just 1 time & their head is not even bleading. But after that 1 hit he was unable to pull a weapon to defend themselves.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIPWJMKZWKo&feature=related"]Head hits concrete[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RLlcrMc2f0"]Head hits concrete seizure[/ame]

 

[WorldWatcher]

I did leave myself outs because (like the rest of "us") I have not seen all of the evidence. This is why my watchword has been "wait."

I am willing to speculate, to a minor extent, though, based on what is known so far:

The only mark on Trayvon Martin (other than the bullet wound, sadly enough) is a single scrape on one knuckle. It would thus appear that Trayvon must not have been on the receiving end of any fight. The same cannot be said of Zimmerman's physical condition.

Actually the autopsy report says the small abrasion was on the left ring finger, not the knuckle.

But I agree, we have seen for months that Martin was "bashing Zimmerman's face in" and one report (since retracted) that it was "MMA" style. Seems odd though that someone pounding in the face of another with repeated blows would have: (a) no damage to their knuckles, and (b) the recipient would have very little damage to their face. What damage there was being consistent with a single good shot to the face.



>>>>

ACTUALLY, it DOES say the knuckle.

State v. Zimmerman: Evidence released by prosecutor

PDF Page 127 begins the Medical Examiners Report which ends on Page 130.

"Other Injuries: There is a 1/4 x 1/8 small abrasion on the left fourth finger."

I see no mention of any other description of injuries.



>>>>

 

[percysunshine]

I hope nobody inspects my body this carefully after I die.

 

[taichiliberal]

I can't help it if you are to stupid to read the police report & not listen to Al Sharpton.

Tracy Martin sent his son Trayvon Martin to Juvenile Detention Officer Brandy Green's care "due to having been suspended for 10 days from his high school in Miami Gardens for possession of cannabis." quoted from Tracy Martin in the police report.

Trayvon Martin had been at the Juvenile Detention Officer's address in this neighborhood for 7 days prior to the event of his death. The police report states that Trayvon had a lighter from the 7-11 store on his possession at the time of his death. So in the middle of being disciplined for his drugs at school Trayvon gets a lighter to do what??? Trayvon had THC drugs in his blood & urine at the event of his death.

Are you sure Trayvon did not snap from being scolded by his father & a Juvenile Detention Officer for 7 days straight while being separated from his girlfriend & other friends at his school & neighborhood??? Do you think that his Father & juvenile detention officer Brandy Green were going to praise him for smoking a joint & getting detained by police in the community while serving detention??? No - Martin was extremely pissed that police were on the way. He knew his ass was grass once his Father & Brandy Green found out.

So Zimmerman stalked, confronted and killed Martin because he had a minor JD record for marijuana, and was on the prowl that night to score more marijuana?

Zimmerman knew this because he's psychic.

And although NO drugs was found on Martin, traces of THC were found in his bloodstream indicating that he (GASP!) must have smoked a joint within a 24 hour period prior to the homicide.

Again, Zimmerman must have been psychic.

Aand although the store video tape shows Martin NOT acting incoherent or disoriented or "weird", Zimmerman just knew he was and was up to no good.

Again, Zimmerman must have been psychic.



Bottom line: You and Zimmerman's story does not bare up to scrutiny. And the newspapers told me that, bunky.....not Al Sharpton.

Bullshit! - YEAH, YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT! JUST ANOTHER INSIPIDLY STUBBORN ZIMMERMAN ZOMBIE THAT WILL PARROT DISTORTIONS, HALF TRUTHS AND SHEER GUESS WORK/WISHFUL THINKING TO JUSTIFY ZIMMERMAN ON ALL LEVELS. PITY ALL THE FACTS JUST KEEP GETTING IN THE WAY. Martin was acting wierd on the 7-11 video. After his transaction was complete he headed one way & then reversed. He went back & picked up something from the floor & then went back again to the drink refrigerators. Then he turned back around & went the other way. He also never took off his hood while in the store. WOW....I DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS A LAW IN FLORIDA THAT SAID YOU HAD TO TAKE OFF YOUR HOOD IN A CONVENIENCE STORE!!?? GET UP TO SPEED, GRANDPA....KIDS AND THEIR WEIRD CLOTHING STYLES HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR SOME TIME....FROM HOODIE WEARING TO WORKMAN CAPS TO TORN JEANS TO PIERCINGS! But according to YOU, a guy can't pick something up off the floor and then suddenly decide he wants a drink and go back to get one. YOU DO REALIZE HOW ABSURD YOU SOUND MAKING THAT ACCUSATION, BUNKY? YOU COME OFF LIKE ONE OF THE IDIOT JURORS IN "Twelve Angry Men" who just HAS TO FIND SOMETHING GUILTY about the accused.

But his girlfriend said he put on his hoodie & put up his hood after seeing Zimmerman.


He was out in the cold rain with no hoodie on & taking 4 times longer than he should have to walk back from the 7-11. But inside he wears the hoodie hood up. Trayvon was defiantly acting weird.

She did? Could you produce the transcript where she said so? And if so, wouldn't that have been AFTER HE LEFT THE WELL LIT CONVENIENCE STORE TO GO OUTSIDE IN THE NIGHT WHEN IT WAS RAINING OFF AND ON? I mean, he would have to take down the hood to see what the hell was going on WITH SOME CREEP FOLLOWING HIM, wouldn't he (peripheral vision and all)? And of course it took him longer to walk home....as he stopped to get a drink and junk food, and was trying to elude some creep who was following him. Again YOU'RE GRASPING AT STRAWS THAT ARE NOT THERE IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY ZIMMERMAN ON ALL COUNTS. Carry on, my Zimmerman zombie.

 

[taichiliberal]

Martin was shot while on top of Zimmerman and beating Zimmerman. Now he's dead and with good reason, deal with it.

And when you have the foresnic report sighting the ballistics that back up EXACTLY when you say here, then we won't view your assertion as just another Zimmerman Zombie with a Bigfoot wishful thinking.