I was being sarcastic, just as you were. Your analogy is just as meaningless as an argument we could have about you following women around your hood.You can't be ing serious. What description exactly? Hoodies? Black? Holding Skittles? What description did he meet?
And so what? If they robberies were committed by a group of women, I have the right to follow any women I please to her home?
How is my analogy meaningless? Explain.
The only difference between my analogy and what actually happened in this case is that you seem to believe it's okay for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon home because he's black and black people were apparently responsible for some break-ins last year. Why couldn't I follow women home then strangle them in self-defence if a bunch of "su ious" women were suspected of break-ins in my neighbourhood? Isn't that a call I have the right to make according to you?
An unknown witness who refuses to go on camera and identifies himself as "John"? Sounds really credible
Do you honestly think the screaming voice in that video sounds anything like the voice on that 911 call? The pitch is noticeably higher.
You also said that "the person following the other person isn't always the aggressor," which is one of the most remarkable things I've ever heard tbh.
Who has reported it or corroborated it other than "John"? Hearsay isn't exactly corroboration. Typically, when a witness tells cops something, the cops go after evidence to corroborate it. What other evidence is there? Did Zimmerman get examined by a doctor
If by reported numerous times you mean reported by "John", then I guess.
Because according to his story he was in pain and terrified. The pain and terror he was feeling wouldn't go away the instant he shot Martin.
Because he wasn't beating someone's ass. He was approached by somebody nearly double his size when he was walking home carrying nothing but skittles. Maybe Zimmerman was threatened by the possibility of Martin pelting him with skittles.
Is this the police report written by the police who drug tested the dead body and didn't drug test the shooter? The biggest reason for why there's so much outrage is because people think the police report is bull and wasn't put together objectively. A 5 year old would be capable of seeing that the police were making every effort possible to get Zimmerman off the hook. Police didn't follow procedure at all and took the easiest and quickest route possible to letting Zimmerman off the hook. That's why they're turning the case over.
There are no women in this case. Women are actually viewed in a completely different way than men when it comes to self defense. If you understand anything about legal disparity of force, then you will understand why your analogy is completely irrelevant.
The legal experts were referencing the part about how Zimmerman said he was chasing Martin and didn't listen to the advice given to him. The experts aren't saying that taking advice is illegal, they're saying that the self defense statute the police have referenced is almost impossible to be used as a defense for Zimmerman.
Yeah Cubby, you're right, it must be the media.
No way it's because they drug tested a dead body but didn't drug test the shooter (something procedure says they should always do). No way it's because they kept Martin's dead body at the morgue for 3 days before contacting his parents. It's gotta be that god damn liberal media!
the police chief having to temporarily resign and hand the investigation to the state destroys the credibility of the police report you're clinging to. That would most certainly impact a trial.
There are procedures police have to go by when investigating and completing reports. When those procedures are ignored and completely butchered like they were here, the credibility of that report goes out the window.
Last edited by Goran Dragic; 03-25-2012 at 11:21 AM.
How are unarmed 17 year old kids who weigh 140 pounds with no criminal history viewed when it comes to the self defense of an armed adult who weighs 240 pounds?
No, in this case there's a 17 year old boy with Skittles being followed by a man with a gun.
But I'm sure you think lethal force was OK to because poor Zimmerman's life was in danger against some big skinny gorilla negro who should've let Zimmerman follow him home
John was interviewed by the police but didn't want his name released publicly. I don't blame him. The police know who it is and there is no doubt he will be subpoenaed if this goes to trial.
Is this the police report written by the police who drug tested the dead body and didn't drug test the shooter? The biggest reason for why there's so much outrage is because people think the police report is bull and wasn't put together objectively. A 5 year old would be capable of seeing that the police were making every effort possible to get Zimmerman off the hook. Police didn't follow procedure at all and took the easiest and quickest route possible to letting Zimmerman off the hook. That's why they're turning the case over.
If you don't want to trust the known facts of the case or the eye-witness testimony then there's no reason to argue. You see corroborated pieces of evidence and say "I don't believe it". So be it. If you believe in a widespread cover up or so much incompetence that the evidence should be ignored, then it doesn't really matter what pieces of evidence there are, because it's all tainted.
I, personally believe there was probably a certain level of incompetence, but there always is. You make claims that i've heard over and over from other people who don't want to accept the facts of the case, things like:
-he wasn't tested for drugs!!!: They don't have to be tested for drugs if there is no probable cause for such a test. They interviewed him for hours at the police station that night. The had no reason to believe he was under the influence of anything.
You want to bring up other cases and lol at facts about this case you don't like, that's fine. But it doesn't change what we know to be true. But then again, that doesn't matter because you'll just choose not to believe it.
Neither of them had their weight taken that night. All we know is that zimmerman is 5'9" ~200 - 240 lbs. And that Martin was 6'0 - 6'2" 160-180 lbs.
I can't beleive you guys are still engaging Jag_Off - lol he's either trolling or clearly lacking intellectual capacity - lol
Thank you for your contributions to this thread, Koolaid Man.
soaking wet with Timerberlands on Martin is 150 tops. I have a hard time believing he was able to take Zimmerman down and dominate a ground fight against him.
At the very least, do you agree that parts of Zimmerman's story are hard to believe? Like the part where he says this wasn't racially motivated in spite of the fact he muttered the words " in coons" under his breath during the 911 call?
Martin has been reported by friends to be up to 180lbs. He was also an athlete. I honestly think he was probably about 6'1" 160... which isn't a whole lot of muscle. But that's the thing, it doesn't really matter what you or I believe could happen in fight with those two. All that matters is what eye-witnesses say and what the evidence says. Zimmerman had his ass beat by someone that night. The s ches to the back of his head, the lacerations on his face, and the wet grass all over his back illustrated as much.
The biggest part of Zimmerman's story that's hard for me to believe is that he said he had actually given up following Martin and was jumped (punched in the back of the head) while going back to his truck. I don't believe that and so I haven't brought that up in any of our discussions.
I also don't believe it was racially motivated. I think Zimmerman would have followed a Mexican and su ious looking white person in a hoodie around the neighborhood just as he did Martin.
There have been numerous audio analysts that have done work on the tape to see if Zimmerman called him a "coon". In fact, it was a huge part of the story when that first hit, but it's died down now and there's a reason for that. Everyone that's analyzed it thinks it sounds more like "punks". I listened to it and truth be told it's hard to hear how anyone could definitively conclude he said any particular word. I think it sounds like "punks" but it also sounds like a million different words. Logically it doesn't make sense that even the most racist person would start calling black people coons while on the phone with a police dispatcher.
What did the police do to corroborate what he said?
Hearsay isn't known facts.
I'm still waiting for you to point out how things were corroborated by something other than hearsay.
This can't be serious, right? That's how this country works. When police up with how evidence was collected or how they arrived at their conclusion (either by simple human error or because they have a hidden agenda), that evidence is thrown out. Regardless, what evidence to cops have other than hearsay from an unnamed witness?
Like keeping a dead 17 year old at the morgue for 3 days before contacting his parents? You view that as a normal level of incompetency? If that's a normal level of incompetency I'd hate to see what an abnormal amount of incompetency looks like.
If shooting an unarmed kid who hadn't engaged in any criminal activity who a 911 dispatcher suggested you stop following isn't probable cause, I'm curious what is. The police would have most likely determined that Zimmerman is just borderline re ed so he seems like he's on drugs, but to say there wasn't probable cause is ridiculous. The police knew that Zimmerman pursued someone (after being advised not to) and the person Zimmerman was pursuing ended up dead.
Yet they felt the need to drug test Martin's dead body. What reason did they have to believe he was under the influence of something, other than the fact that " in coons" wearing hoodies are drug abusing thugs most of the time.
That other case shows that a white police department in the South covering up the murder of a black guy isn't some far fetched possibility.
If you seriously think that Martin screaming is something "we know to be true" then I don't even know what to say.
Hey Jag_Off you have to please do me a favor....send this link to your friends on the other website...
Bill Maher Panel Mocks Rural Mississippi Residents
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/...elosi-out-inte
The police were able to view Zimmerman's body to corroborate witness testimony.
They tested Martin's body for alcohol or narcotics because Zimmerman reported in his 911 call that Martin appeared to be "on drugs or something" and Martin's story was backed up by all available evidence. There was no reason not to believe him.
You say it wasn’t Zimmerman screaming for help. The evidence and eye-witness testimony doesn’t support that.
You say it isn’t probable that Martin was actually beating zimmerman’s ass while he was pinned on the ground. A HUGE amount of evidence doesn’t support that.
You claim complete incompetence on the part of the police department, but even 2+ weeks later, after FBI intervention, there still hasn’t been an arrest. With so much incompetence, you’d think the FBI would be able to find holes in the case and reasons for an arrest, right?
You could dispute all the facts, be proven wrong, and then still say it doesn’t matter, those facts don’t matter. I get it.
Or, make an arrest despite no holes nor reasons.
I'm gonna go jerk off and then pick up my Outback to-go order. It was a solid discussion overall.
Truth be told, Zimmerman did a lot of bad with his stupidity. Not just to the Martin family, but to a lot of residents in Florida. Even people who legally CCW are going to be viewed in a negative light because of this.
Not someone who makes one fear for his life.
Yes it does. Claiming self defense isn't like a normal criminal case, the burden of proof lies on the accused to prove that a "reasonable person" would feel that their life was in danger in that scenario. A "reasonable person" who weighs 240 pounds carrying a gun wouldn't feel that their life is threatened by someone who's unarmed and weighs significantly less than he did.
It's not nearly that simple. It's not a normal setting where the police have the burden of proof and until they disprove Zimmerman's claim of self defense he gets to cling to it. Zimmerman's 911 call is one of many things that makes it nearly impossible to fullfill the burden of proof that A) a "reasonable person" would fear for their life in his scenario and B) he actually feared for his life in this scenario.
I disagree but the race aspect is irrelevant and doesn't matter.
Whether or not it was punks or coons, it doesn't sound like someone fearing for his life.
I think we've established awhile ago that Zimmerman critical thinking skills are a few fries short of a happy meal
If zimmerman was capable of beating up someone 50 pounds less than him he wouldn't need to walk around with a gun.
Getting a medical examiner to corroborate testimony is something cops would do in that situation. When the only issue at hand is whether or not the shooting was self defense, the cops aren't supposed to look for the quickest way possible to arrive at the conclusion it was self defense. They're supposed to be skeptical and go to great lengths to verify everything. When a large part of Zimmerman's story rests on his physical injuries, there should have been a medical examiner.
This evidence should be produced. The fact that they didn't have a medical examiner confirm Zimmerman's condition raises eyebrows. You can't describe evidence without producing it. Why weren't there at least pictures taken of various physical ailments Zimmerman suffered?
I personally don't think testimony from "John" is credible. He claimed that he said "Stop I'm calling 911", went upstairs and saw that Martin was laying on the ground. Why didn't he call 911 since he said he was going to? Why would Zimmerman take an ass kicking and yell for help, then shoot Martin after hearing the witness say he was calling 911. At that point he had even less reason to fear for his life knowing that 911 was being called. It doesn't add up.
Is the FBi investigating the actual case or how the police department handled it (serious question since I don't know).
I thought I heard that the state is now investigating it and is examining what the police have compiled. To answer your question though, my guess is that with the media breathing down the neck of everyone involved, the FBI is going to be more methodical than usual examining everything.
The FBI has their work cut out for them and at this point I'd be shocked if Zimmerman spends a day in jail. I have no idea what the law is here, but while it's his burden of proof to claim self defense, the local police already accepted his story and possibly didn't put the proper evidence together when filing their report. Should the day come when he needs one, Zimmerman's lawyer was gift wrapped the argument, "Well sorry about the local's police's incompetence and failure to gather evidence but they told my client his story checks out and he's free to go. He fulfilled his burden of proof once in the eyes of police and it'd be ridiculous to make him do it again."
Once I see the actual evidence (not the cops description of the evidence) of how bloody and banged up Zimmerman was, I'll admit I'm wrong. The way I see it, is that if the police really had evidence proving that Zimmerman was bloody and beat up, there's no way they wouldn't have released it by now given the intense media pressure they're under.
Last edited by Goran Dragic; 03-25-2012 at 12:48 PM.
Man seriously I would have dusted that fat s hide...had he gotten that close to me where I could actually break his nose - no ing way he gets a shot off on me...I've trained in MMA and know how to take down, but my assumption is that anyone that approaches me to start some must be packing so my approach to disarm / and put down (whether it's knife, gun, or stick) that person will be quite different than a person who I know for sure is not packing
I would love to get a one on one with Zimmerman...he's indeed a fat punk that obviously couldn't handle a 17 yr old kid...but I know some people don't like to hear it...but it's true..had that been my son and if Zimmerman gets off - I would have him murdered plain and simple - I don't play that ..mind our ing business and we won't have issues
You wouldn't have done , . You're too scared to call into a internet radio show, so there's no way in you're stepping up to anyone on the street.
And
The gang banger in the first part of "Grand Canyon" superlatively explains the gun as a symbol. Kevin Kline's character comes out of the GWF (before the Spurs shuttered it) gets frustrated with traffic and pulls out into a side street and ends up in the wrong part of LA. His car conks out and he's stuck waiting for a tow truck when the homies roll up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
