The youtube video you linked has the orientation of the holster wrong. This isZimmerman’s actual holster with metal belt clip. When worn on the right side, the butt of the pistol will be to the rear, not to the front, so the draw which Zimmerman demonstrated would be a proper draw.
It looks like the bottom of the holster is to the right side in that picture.
His defense fits EVERY bit of evidence.
He has stated that Martin was on top of him hitting and banging his head. He said he was on the ground with his back on the grass and head on the sidewalk. The evidence and witnesses back this up. He stated Martin initiated the verbal confrontation and the evidence back this up. He said he yelled for help repeatedly. The 911 tape and witnesses backs this up.
there is nothing that contradicts his account of the assault and subsequent shooting of Martin in self defense.
The only WTF is that you linked to the video. You grab what you can grab with whatever hand you can grab it with in an emergency. Do you think Martin was playing by the Queensbury rules of assault? The exact motion of reaching for the gun is irrelevant to the fact that Zimmerman shot Martin and admits doing so.
All the things that you keep swearing are irrelevant are clearly not irrelevant because he’s been charged with murder.
Let me repeat that. He’s been charged with murder.
And he’s sitting in jail right now because, on top of being an accused murderer, he 's a dumbass liar. That’s not irrelevant either.
You might think these things shouldn’t be relevant. But guess what? What you think is irrelevant as it relates to Zimmerman’s fate. All the evidence coming out that trends against his story is relevant. It’s not a question of if. At this point, it’s just a question of how.
lol
If O’Mara is as much of a crappy lawyer as you are, Zimmerman doesn’t have a prayer in this world.
so - no response, monstro? Speechless? Figures.
Well since she didn’t post your latest conspiracy video as evidence I don’t see your point or the point of the video.
Not even close, quite the opposite in fact - the evidence refutes it. The only thing you mentioned that any evidence backs up is that Martin was on top of him at some point. There is no evidence that Martin was banging his head, much less on concrete. He had no bruising, no swelling, no concussion, no fracture - not even a scrape, which is the least you would expect when a practically bald head comes into violent and repeated contact with concrete. He had two small cuts, which is what you would expect from incidentally falling or wrestling around on a twig or small rock in the grass.
Again, the only evidence there is for that completely refutes his version of events. That evidence says TM asked “Why are you following me?” (Which would be quite odd for someone who is approaching someone else to ask.) GZ’s ludicrous version of events (before he was aware of an ear-witness) was that TM approached him and asked “You got a problem homie? … You do now! <kapow>” So, no, the only evidence does exactly the opposite of backing him up.
And yet again, there is no evidence that it was him who was yelling for help. And with this, we have multiple indications of the police repeatedly tainting witness testimony by suggesting the person yelling “help” was GZ, and even correcting a witness who initially said that it was TM. That is way, way out of bounds for an investigating officer to coach, influence, or correct people’s testimony. Which only brings in to question what other things they might have influenced that we don’t know about.
Except practically everything. When so many aspects of his account ***are ***contradicted, you really have to wonder about the veracity of all the other aspects of his account for which there is no supporting or controverting evidence.
You seem all too eager to accept the complete veracity of all his statements, even where there are many contradictions. It’s no wonder then that you completely accept and cling to those of his statements that aren’t (and can’t be) directly contradicted, but also aren’t supported by anything except his quite tenuous acquaintance with telling the truth.
That’s not very rational thinking, you know.
That’s simply not true. The back of his head shows multiple wounds. His shirt is wet. It exactly matches his account of his position during the assault.
He had a broken nose and 2 black eyes.
this was from Martin’s girlfriend who stated that she heard Martin speak first.
The evidence that he was yelling for help was the 911 call and his documented wounds versus no wounds on Martin.
It’s not a function of believing Zimmerman. It’s a function of logic and looking at the evidence that corroborates it.
We’ve been over all of this. It’s not new information. He showed signs of obvious injuries, they’re documented at the scene and again by his doctor. It all fits his account of what happened. It’s pointless to deny that he was assaulted.
The orientation of the gun in the holster is irrelevant. I’ve posted this at least three times, and I find it quite telling that GZ’s supporters completely ignore it, mainly because it essentially proves that GZ’s story is complete hogwash.
a) it is hard to imagine that Martin would have been able to see a black gun, in a black holster, near GZ’s back pocket, in the dark, since - according to GZ - at the time GZ was on the ground, on his back, resting on the gun,
b) it is physically impossible to ‘pin TM’s arm’ with his right arm, while simultaneously drawing a gun that he’s lying on top of, with the same arm,
c) we also have to believe that GZ was able to draw his gun in a way that defies physics, and also do it so fast that TM was completely helpless to stop it, even though he has at least one hand free,
d) if GZ’s arms were free to do the ‘pinning and gun drawing’, WTF was GZ doing while TM was supposedly whalin’ on him?
Magiver: You’re not fooling anyone with these completely disingenuous, non-responsive, subject-changing replies. I don’t even think you’re fooling yourself, because I know you’re not stupid. So why do it? The only thing I can come up with is that you hope to tire people out from having to repeatedly respond to such transparently false conclusions based on transparent misrepresentations of facts, that even if they *were *true, still wouldn’t be relevant to the points you claim they refute.
You originally asserted that the evidence showed that his head was pounded repeatedly into concrete. I pointed out that the two small cuts (“multiple wounds” - hah, nice obfuscation) were NOT even close to evidence of that, and any evidence for what you asserted was wholly absent. (e.g. A LOT more than the two small cuts.) And you know that.
And I conceded that there was evidence that GZ was on his back with TM on top of him at some point, but that does NOT “exactly match his account of his position” since there is NO evidence that his head was in contact with concrete. And you know that.
Now you’re getting even sillier, because you know very well that we were discussing evidence regarding his head being slammed into the concrete. A slightly broken nose and two slightly black eyes are NOT evidence that the back of his head was repeatedly slammed into concrete (neither are two small cuts), and all they ARE evidence of is ONE punch while they were both still standing upright. And you know that.
Yes, she heard him speak first and the dialog was COMPLETELY different (and much more believable) to what GZ asserted was said before he was aware that there was a living witness to what was said. So, stating that the evidence here backs up GZ is straight up false. And you know that.
There is NO evidence that he (GZ) was the one yelling for help. The evidence that it was TM yelling is at least as compelling, so it’s pretty much a wash at best. And no wounds on Martin except for that hole in his heart, right? The kind of wound that comes from a gunshot, preceded by the kind of yelling that comes from someone fighting for their life to prevent someone with a gun from shooting them, and followed by instantaneous and complete silence.
Yes.
Yes, we have, unfortunately. But you keep repeating the same bullshit, and using the same tired and transparent tactics to draw completely unsupported conclusions that you ridiculously proclaim as facts.
He was injured, yes, but not nearly as much as you like to portray it, and NOTHING that indicates more than ONE punch, a fall, and/or some minor wrestling on the ground. He declined to even go to the hospital on multiple occasions.
Not by a longshot. His injuries DO NOT fit with what he said happened and what you continue to assert happened as if it were based on facts. I can’t see how you wouldn’t know that, but at least you should.
Nobody has denied that he got punched in the nose. What he did to bring that about, now there’s the rub.
Not only this, but Zimmerman’s gun was very small. “Tiney Niney” is it’s nickname. The butt would not have gone past Zimmerman’s waistband, if it had been holstered during the fight.
I think Martin probably did see the gun. I think Zimmerman was foolish enough to have run after the kid while brandishing it. And a witness is on record saying she saw someone with a flashlight running. Anyone who can’t imagine that Zimmerman would be so stupid and impulsive to do such a crazy thing just isn’t paying attention.
If you’re right, why would anyone fight someone with a loaded gun, or not explain they were just visiting the area? It doesn’t take minutes to run the short distance from where Zimmerman’s truck is parked to where Trayvon’s body was found. It takes seconds, and Trayvon had a head start even before Zimmerman got out of the vehicle, which he probably didn’t need.
The evidence is his injuries. When I was a kid I fell straight back on the cement hard enough to be knocked out cold. It did not break the skin. No blood. It takes some doing to break the skin.
That’s complete nonsense. We know from eye witness and the 911 tape that this went on for a considerable amount of time. It wasn’t a tickle fight. Listen to what you’re saying: “a slightly broken nose”… “2 slightly black eyes”… “2 small cuts”… You’re just trying to marginalize the fact that there were multiple injuries.
Much more believable to who? They’re both going to be biased toward their own story. The relevant part that’s common between both stories is who spoke first. Zimmerman’s account is much more likely given Martin’s behavior. We know he was on top of Zimmerman which means he was able to knock him down which also indicates he sucker punched him. There is no reason Martin didn’t home beyond a desire to confront Zimmerman. According to both accounts they had lost contact with each other and the time frame allows for Martin to safely return home.
Right, there’s no wounds of Martin except the gunshot wound. All the other injuries were of someone struck repeatedly.
There is no indication that Martin was struggling against someone holding a gun. If Martin was on top struggling with a gun he would have had the advantage of the mass of his body to grab and push the gun away. The evidence showed that he repeatedly struck Zimmerman. This is not up for debate. So the logical conclusion is that Zimmerman was the one doing the yelling and that’s what he testified to and the evidence of the call backs up his testimony.
[quote=“voltaire, post:2893, topic:619125”]
He was injured, yes, but not nearly as much as you like to portray it, and NOTHING that indicates more than ONE punch, a fall, and/or some minor wrestling on the ground. He declined to even go to the hospital on multiple occasions.
Yes, ye was injured. Martin was not. One punch and one fall is fantasy given that we know this event went on for a significant period of time. And why would he need to go to the hospital? This keeps getting brought up. The concept behind self defense is to prevent life threatening injuries.
The injuries are consistent with his account. And you keep using the word “facts” incorrectly. The word is “evidence”. In this case it starts with Zimmerman’s account which is then compared to other evidence. Was he struck down? It appears so. Was Martin on top of him for an extended period of time hitting him? It appears so. Did he sustain injuries to his face and the back of his head? It appears so.
The poster on youtube obviously doesn’t know that the holster is worn inside the pants and is a worn on the right hip. It isn’t that startling that Zimmerman would carry the firearm on the right hand side. The pistol has right hand ejection port and some people don’t like getting a shell casing in the face. I didn’t mind that, but it hurt like a SOB when it goes down the front of your shirt. It left a burn on my chest. I actually practiced with both hands.
Keep in mind that Martin would only get one free shot at banging Zimmerman’s head into the concrete. The natural reaction would be for Zimmerman to stiffen his neck muscles and resist. Try pushing your head back with you hand. Try pushing your head back while pushing with both hands. See the difference? Trying to pound somebody in the concrete while you are straddling them isn’t a well planned maneuver.
I also don’t think Martin was trying to suffocate Zimmerman. He was trying to stop Zimmerman from screaming. If you know that their are people around, then screaming is a pretty good strategy. The daughter of a friend of mine drove off an assailant when he approached her in the driveway of her parents house one night.
Joel, what do you think Zimmerman was doing with his hands? And why aren’t you troubled by the lack of gunshot residue on Martin?
If the prosecution’s experts testify that there is no way a person can fire a weapon the way Zimmerman claims happened without leaving behind more evidence, would this be enough to convince you that there’s something fishy about the story?
The forensic evidence released shows gunshot residue on Martin’s clothes and Martin’s skin.
Annnd what GSR was on Zimmerman?
CMC fnord!