Swing_n_Speed Posted July 15, 2013 Posted July 15, 2013 Can you cite a source which says Zimmermann returned to his truck immediately after the 911 call. There was a phone call to 911 at 7PM where he was warned not to follow. He does so anyway. http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/20/us/florida-zimmerman-timeline the fight started around 7:15-7:20 PM because the 911 call on his death was ta 7:25 P< Zimmermann walked because he claimed self defense under the stand your ground law, which is ironic since he confronted Martin in the first place despite being warned by 911 not to do so. When a much older man follows you in the middle of the night, most people construe that as a threat. So did Martin who was just a teenager and challenged Zimmerman physically. Zimmerman couldnt take it and shot him Martin in close range. the key part of Zimmerman's defense was that Martin slammed his head repeatedly into the sidewalk, atleast 2 eyewitnesses denied seeing this. One even said the boy was crying for help. Also his injuries - a bust open nose and lacerations on the back are not consistent with someone banging your head against a sidewalk. Your entire notion that Zimmerman first approached Martin is based on one line by CNN? From the same article. 'According to an Orlando Sentinel story later confirmed by Sanford police, Zimmerman tells authorities that, after Zimmerman briefly lost track of Martin, the teen approached him. After the two exchange words, Zimmerman says, he reaches for his cell phone, and then Martin punches him in the nose. Zimmerman says Martin pins him to the ground and begins slamming his head into the sidewalk.' ZImmerman lost track of Martin. End of. Zimmerman would then have jotted down the address to the cops and Martin would've been munching on skittles in his house. Instead Martin 800 feet from his destination, doubled back and pursued Zimmerman. As far as his injuries go, the man said he was defending himself, with his head being slammed into the sidewalk. What do you want him to do, suffer a concussion and brain damage before he decided to defend himself? And there were witnesses who defended Zimmerman including a forensic expert. Zimmerman was a douche make no bones bout it, but you gotta admit Trayvon was looking for a fight.And it ended bad for both parties involved. Blame the system, blame the laws, but in this particular case Zimmerman proved that he acted in self defense and won. It's crazy because here a kid lost his life over a bit of over aggression and another punk's over enthusiasm. That said the case was a grey area and Zimmerman proved he acted in self defense! Just accept it and accept the fact that America is one giant mess of a society!
Swing_n_Speed Posted July 15, 2013 Posted July 15, 2013 When the President takes sides even before the trial then how is this not reverse racism. Offcourse. Obama should be called out for it. Basically it could be construed that Obama was in a way trying to incite violence for his own political gain. Quite disgusting really.
bulbul Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Got 65 years in prison for that shooting Is that defensive killings?
bulbul Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 She fired the warning shot into the roof. Had a restraining order against the abusive husband since 2009 and actually tried to escape first but the garage door was locked so she came back into the home with a gun and fired a warning shot. Gray (the husband) in his initial deposition stated that the gun was aimed at the roof, not at him. Where is the ruckus? Does American president had any comments?
Deleted_User_1 Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 This case epitomizes many of the things that is wrong with America – a horrific gun glorifying culture' date=' sensationalist media, a legal system that seeks to exploit human tragedies for personal publicity and gain and a finally, a strong under current of racism.[/quote'] ++++++++++++
Jersey #10 Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 This case epitomizes many of the things that is wrong with America – a horrific gun glorifying culture' date=' sensationalist media, a legal system that seeks to exploit human tragedies for personal publicity and gain and a finally, a strong under current of racism.[/quote'] hit the nail on the head!
ganeshran Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Your entire notion that Zimmerman first approached Martin is based on one line by CNN? From the same article. 'According to an Orlando Sentinel story later confirmed by Sanford police, Zimmerman tells authorities that, after Zimmerman briefly lost track of Martin, the teen approached him. After the two exchange words, Zimmerman says, he reaches for his cell phone, and then Martin punches him in the nose. Zimmerman says Martin pins him to the ground and begins slamming his head into the sidewalk.' ZImmerman lost track of Martin. End of. Zimmerman would then have jotted down the address to the cops and Martin would've been munching on skittles in his house. Instead Martin 800 feet from his destination, doubled back and pursued Zimmerman. As far as his injuries go, the man said he was defending himself, with his head being slammed into the sidewalk. What do you want him to do, suffer a concussion and brain damage before he decided to defend himself? And there were witnesses who defended Zimmerman including a forensic expert. Zimmerman was a douche make no bones bout it, but you gotta admit Trayvon was looking for a fight.And it ended bad for both parties involved. Blame the system, blame the laws, but in this particular case Zimmerman proved that he acted in self defense and won. It's crazy because here a kid lost his life over a bit of over aggression and another punk's over enthusiasm. That said the case was a grey area and Zimmerman proved he acted in self defense! Just accept it and accept the fact that America is one giant mess of a society! Dude, Zimmerman lost track of him after following Martin. The picture you are painting here makes no sense. Zimmermann saw Martin for the first time and called 911 when he was asked not to follow him. He returns to his truck, and there are 10 minutes where nothing happened and suddenly Martin approached him out of the blue. Martin was aware of Zimmerman's existence because he was followed in the first place, regardless of the fact that Zimmerman lost track If your contention is that he returned to the truck immediately, provide a source for the same. No eyewitness corroborated the part where Zimmerman claimed his head was repeatedly slammed into the sidewak, his injuries were not consistent with the damages. It only ended badly for one of the parties involved. What Zimmerman basically did was follow someone who was much bigger, provoked him into a fight and then shot him in the name of the self defense. You try it yourself, go and follow anyone in the night and see if they perceive it as a threat. Martin might have been much bigger than Zimmerman but he was still a teenager who was scared. When faced with a fight of flee decision in the face of a threat, he chose to fight. Here Zimmerman, who couldnt put up a fight, and shot him
bulbul Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 You try it yourself' date=' go and follow anyone in the night and see if they perceive it as a threat. Martin might have been much bigger than Zimmerman [b']but he was still a teenager who was scared. When faced with a fight of flee decision in the face of a threat, he chose to fight. Here Zimmerman, who couldnt put up a fight, and shot him How did you deduce this?
Brainfade Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 This case epitomizes many of the things that is wrong with America – a horrific gun glorifying culture' date=' sensationalist media , a legal system that seeks to exploit human tragedies for personal publicity and gain and a finally, a strong under current of racism.[/quote'] Agreed, with a few edits: This case epitomizes many of the things that is wrong with America – a horrific gun glorifying culture, sensationalist media that had no qualms doctoring 911 tapes to make Zimmerman sound like a guilty racist within weeks of the incident (not to mention the people who lapped it all up without giving any thought), a legal system that seeks to exploit human tragedies for personal publicity and gain, a President who sought to exploit this human tragedy for personal gain by stirring up emotions in a swing state and finally, a strong under current of racism.
Brainfade Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Dude' date=' Zimmerman lost track of him [b']after following Martin. The picture you are painting here makes no sense. Zimmermann saw Martin for the first time and called 911 when he was asked not to follow him. He returns to his truck, and there are 10 minutes where nothing happened and suddenly Martin approached him out of the blue. Martin was aware of Zimmerman's existence because he was followed in the first place, regardless of the fact that Zimmerman lost track If your contention is that he returned to the truck immediately, provide a source for the same. No eyewitness corroborated the part where Zimmerman claimed his head was repeatedly slammed into the sidewak, his injuries were not consistent with the damages. It only ended badly for one of the parties involved. What Zimmerman basically did was follow someone who was much bigger, provoked him into a fight and then shot him in the name of the self defense. You try it yourself, go and follow anyone in the night and see if they perceive it as a threat. Martin might have been much bigger than Zimmerman but he was still a teenager who was scared. When faced with a fight of flee decision in the face of a threat, he chose to fight. Here Zimmerman, who couldnt put up a fight, and shot him Which encapsulates why the State should've charged GZ with negligent homicide or illegal discharge of a weapon or some other charge smaller than murder ... and ensured a guilty verdict. But, nossir, they wanted to hit it out of the park with beer evidence and champagne charges.
Swing_n_Speed Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Dude' date=' Zimmerman lost track of him [b']after following Martin. The picture you are painting here makes no sense. Zimmermann saw Martin for the first time and called 911 when he was asked not to follow him. He returns to his truck, and there are 10 minutes where nothing happened and suddenly Martin approached him out of the blue. Martin was aware of Zimmerman's existence because he was followed in the first place, regardless of the fact that Zimmerman lost track If your contention is that he returned to the truck immediately, provide a source for the same. No eyewitness corroborated the part where Zimmerman claimed his head was repeatedly slammed into the sidewak, his injuries were not consistent with the damages. It only ended badly for one of the parties involved. What Zimmerman basically did was follow someone who was much bigger, provoked him into a fight and then shot him in the name of the self defense. You try it yourself, go and follow anyone in the night and see if they perceive it as a threat. Martin might have been much bigger than Zimmerman but he was still a teenager who was scared. When faced with a fight of flee decision in the face of a threat, he chose to fight. Here Zimmerman, who couldnt put up a fight, and shot him Ok so basically you're saying that Zimmerman stalked Martin, initiated confrontation, and then shot him in self defense. All the eyewitnesses refuted his statements and yet Zimmerman walked! That's what you're saying right? Well for the final time let's go over this, ok? For starters why don't you go over the re-enactment, which was NOT disproved in court. First listen to the phone call he made.He was asked for directions, which is why he exited the car. He gave directions, asked the cops to meet with him, was heading back to his truck (which you will see in the enactment vid) when Martin came up to him and started the altercation. http://www.hlntv.com/interactive/2013/06/17/zimmerman-trayvon-map-interactive Watch both the re-enactment video and listen to the phone call! That should prove to you Zimmerman was walking back to his truck, with Martin nowhere in sight. What do you mean no eye-witnesses corroborated? The forensic expert, Jonathan Good or the lacerations at the back of Zimmerman's head? The only bone of contention was the voice heard during the 911 call...which no one could prove. If you heard Zimmerman talk, you'd very well say it was Zimmerman crying for help. Finally your last paragraph is utter nonsense. There was no threat. He ambushed Zimmerman and attacked him. At no point did it seem like Martin was ever in fear. If I was in the same situation I'd go home! And secondly I doubt any of us would start throwing punches around! Look at the route from the grocery store to Martins house. He could've taken the obvious shortcut. Why you think he took the long-cut? And even with the long-cut he was still real close to his destination, and yet he chose to attack Zimmerman. At many points in this supposed stalking of Martin, Zimmerman had no idea where Martin was, but Martin always knew where Zimmerman was! Just admit, Martin was looking for a fight and it ended badly! Seriously who calls the cops, gives out his name, address and phone number, asks the cops to meet him at a spot close-by while planning a murder. What Zimmerman did was completely legal, he saw something suspicious, he called the cops. He never initiated any confrontation with Martin, nor did he actively stalk him. What Martin did, assaulting Zimmerman was against the law.
Swing_n_Speed Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Which encapsulates why the State should've charged GZ with negligent homicide or illegal discharge of a weapon or some other charge smaller than murder ... and ensured a guilty verdict. But' date=' nossir, they wanted to hit it out of the park with beer evidence and champagne charges.[/quote'] Once the corrupt president took sides in this case ,it put pressure on a whole host of organizations to prove him right! And this was the only way they could do it and they failed! Someone should hold all parties guilty of sensationalizing this case (for the simple purpose of creating tensions) accountable!
CSK Fan Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 What Martin did, assaulting Zimmerman was against the law. How on earth you are equating physically assaulting someone with killing a 17 year old kid is beyond me. In the end the victim was Martin. He was just a 17 year old who paid the price because a vigilante, with no official power stalked him. At that age hormones are running high, I have myself picked fights for the flimsiest of reasons because that's how teenagers behave. However, I was lucky enough to born in a country where a) people are not allowed to carry guns just like that and b) people don't allow you to get away with murder just because someone started a physical altercation Street fights happen every day, everywhere in the world. How many people get killed in a 1 on 1 fight? Zimmerman's life was never under threat. Yet he took a life and got away scott free. Shows how cheap a life is in the US. There is no defense fr taking a life in such circumstances. Being beaten up is not enough reason to get away with murder, other wise half of the teenage population will be killed BTW, do you have an explanation for the black woman getting 20 years just for a warning shot in self-defense in Florida itself?
Crookbond Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 MTC - I don't think you can compare cases here unless the charges brought by the plaintiff and the witness evidences corroborated are similar.
CSK Fan Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 How did you deduce this? Some of your posts are extremely naive, and I believe purposefully. I don't know what kind of superman you were at 17, but alone at night, being followed by a suspicious dude is scary for any one, let alone 17 year old. And in those conditions you imagine all sorts of things and either flight or sometimes you are too scared but too young to want to show it, so the only response is to fight If this was enough to earn a death sentence, half of youngsters in India would be dead
bulbul Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 BTW' date=' do you have an explanation for the black woman getting 20 years just for a warning shot in self-defense in Florida itself?[/quote'] 1. 20 year is some absurd law , she should have gotten away with 3 years max. 2. I am still not sure she applied Stand your ground rule in first attemp. you are yet to answer why there was no ruckus in that case.
CSK Fan Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 MTC - I don't think you can compare cases here unless the charges brought by the plaintiff and the witness evidences corroborated are similar. Then that shows the loopholes in the system, doesn't it Anyways, even without comparison, it's a poor society which allows the death of an unarmed kid to go unpunished. A Life was taken, a very young life
Swing_n_Speed Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 How on earth you are equating physically assaulting someone with killing a 17 year old kid is beyond me. In the end the victim was Martin. He was just a 17 year old who paid the price because a vigilante, with no official power stalked him. At that age hormones are running high, I have myself picked fights for the flimsiest of reasons because that's how teenagers behave. However, I was lucky enough to born in a country where a) people are not allowed to carry guns just like that and b) people don't allow you to get away with murder just because someone started a physical altercation Street fights happen every day, everywhere in the world. How many people get killed in a 1 on 1 fight? Zimmerman's life was never under threat. Yet he took a life and got away scott free. Shows how cheap a life is in the US. There is no defense fr taking a life in such circumstances. Being beaten up is not enough reason to get away with murder, other wise half of the teenage population will be killed BTW, do you have an explanation for the black woman getting 20 years just for a warning shot in self-defense in Florida itself? Did you follow the chain of argument between Ganesh and myself or just decided to chip in somewhere convenient. Right now we're only debating who initiated the confrontation. I agree with what you say cent percent. But hell we're talking about America here, with their ridiculous gun laws, mistrust and uber violent societies. As I said blame the system, blame the laws, but within the framework of those laws Zimmermen defended himself(in court)!
bulbul Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Some of your posts are extremely naive, and I believe purposefully. I don't know what kind of superman you were at 17, but alone at night, being followed by a suspicious dude is scary for any one, let alone 17 year old. And in those conditions you imagine all sorts of things and either flight or sometimes you are too scared but too young to want to show it, so the only response is to fight If this was enough to earn a death sentence, half of youngsters in India would be dead If i remember correctly , atleast 3 times i posted you 'assume' too much.Dont be a judge. how do you know he was scared , he may have been angry. Why should a guy kill a scared 17 year old ? that also after calling police & giving them his details.
CSK Fan Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 1. 20 year is some absurd law , she should have gotten away with 3 years max. 2. I am still not sure she applied Stand your ground rule in first attemp. you are yet to answer why there was no ruckus in that case. What si the applied stand your ground thing? What do you think a judge's role in the court is? Do you know judges instruct juries on which laws applies and which doesn't? An appellant does not need to apply for anything If I murder tomorrow in the US, can I apply for my case to be tried under pick-pocket charges? There was no ruckus, because no one got hurt. The bit of ruckus happened after the sentencing But no one got away with murder in that case, or else there would have been a huge ruckus
Recommended Posts