I’d say the stupid, unsupported opinion is that which tries to paint TM as a vicious thug, based on the flimsiest of factual evidence and the words of a man who has previous for getting physical with strangers. But, none of this seems to matter with Zimmerman defenders. It’s all about what Martin should and shouldn’t have done, and not about what responsibility Z had for putting him in that situation.
Yup…
Glad we have some backup here…
It’s not Zimmerman’s actions that matter (some have actually said this).
The onus (in their minds) is on Martin.
All of it.
Prove that they were and that based on the GREAT pictures of Zimmerman’s supposed injuries, those injuries were caused by his head being “pounded into the pavement”.
Again I must point out the dramatically different modes of “shooting the breeze on the Internet” and “discussing evidence in the context of a trial.”
If each side has an equal burden of proof, as I guess would be the case in a shooting-the-breeze discussion, then your request is quite reasonable.
But of course, in a criminal trial, the sides don’t. In that circumstance, you can’t respond to a request to “prove it,” by saying, “No, you prove it.” Only the prosecution must prove their case, not the defense.
Any Zimmerman defenders curious why the person who was right there to photograph the back of Z’s head didn’t also take a pic of his bloodied face?
There is no other reasonable explanation for Zimmerman’s injuries and that is what you’re asking the state to prove.
They are conclusive that a fight took place at a specific time and who was involved. The injuries of one person and the lack of injuries on another indicate the who struck whom. The combined evidence of witnesses, injuries, autopsy and items found on the ground are consistent with Zimmerman’s account which the state must prove wrong beyond a reasonable doubt.
Malice has nothing to do with anything. Martin is not on trial. Zimmerman’s injuries are consistent with a fight and his perception of Martin’s intent begins with an extended assault and ends with a struggle for a gun. The state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this didn’t happen. The 911 phone call with the screams gives a partial account of the time involved.
No Martial Arts training needed. Either a sucker punch to the head or a shoulder butt will take someone down. Martin was taller and in better physical shape than Zimmerman.
If a 5’ 11” 158 lb 17 year old male got on top of you you’d be in serious trouble. The advantage is substantial.
If there were such a thing as a professional bar bouncer I would agree with you. The skill required to be a bar bouncer is the ability to stand in front of a door. I’ve seen a fair number of them get their ass kicked. A GOOD bouncer learns how to recognize a bad situation before it connects with his face and tries to defuse it. Zimmerman had to have recognized the threat that Martin posed and potentially did not do enough IMO to defuse it. If Dee Dee’s account is correct there was virtually no time to defuse it. If Zimmerman’s account is correct there was a small window of time to convey the situation from his POW and let Martin know the police were close by which would be a good reason not to assault Zimmerman. Based on both phone conversations Martin and Zimmerman distrusted the other.
He should have shot him again to ensure Martin was dead before pushing him off. It had to be apparent when he pushed him off or he fell off that the bullet struck something. At that point the prudent thing would have been to ensure Martin was no longer a threat.
Dee Dee wasn’t there. She has no way of knowing who said it. If you look at her statement she states that she heard “get off” a little bit. This point was addressed by the interviewer and she repeated that she heard it a little bit. Whoever said it would certainly not whisper it so either the headset fell off or she heard someone further away from the headset say it.
That’s pure fantasy speculation and would not be allowed in court. You can’t just make shit up. Well you can of course. You’ve been doing it all along.
Yes, it’s not about me. But there is no reason to speculate that Zimmerman would commit a crime in front of police to avoid embarrassment. What evidence do you have for this bizarre speculation?
As Bricker pointed out, it’s up to the Prosecution to prove it’s supposition. In this case, the prosecution would have to prove the injuries on the back of his head couldn’t be caused by cement. The evidence is Zimmerman’s injuries, the pictures, EMT reports, Zimmerman’s wet shirt, and
the witnesses who saw someone on the ground. There is zero chance the prosecution can prove the injuries were not caused by head strikes to the cement.
Zimmerman did not, according to the evidence we have, put Martin in a situation where he had to do anything. There was no reason whatsoever for Martin not to continue to walk home with his snacks, and continue with his life.
He chose not to, for reasons that almost certainly died with him.
There is nothing whatsoever wrong with following someone and asking them what they are doing. It cannot give rise to any reasonable fear, and so cannot justify physical force.
If you think Zimmerman is guilty of anything, show us the fucking evidence. You and others have been asked repeatedly to do this, and have refused. Meanwhile, you’ve been repeatedly shown evidence of Zimmerman’s innocence, which you have only been able to rebut with wild speculation.
You’re right about one thing though. Zimmerman’s past doesn’t matter to me when attempting to determine the legality or morality of his actions in this particular case, and they shouldn’t matter to you either. That they do simply show that you’ve decided he’s guilty because you dislike him. Which is an immoral, unjust, prejudiced, disgusting thing to do.
Right, right - breaking Zimmerman’s nose and gashing his head was all in good fun.
And there was nothing malicious about Zimmerman approaching Martin - it was a prelude to a nice game of hide-and-seek.
That’s why Zimmerman, after shooting a hole in Martin, said “you’re It.”
Regards,
Shodan
Nobody thinks it’s conclusive. I don’t know how many times it’s been explained to you. The Defense Counsel doesn’t have to prove anything conclusively. The Prosecution has to prove it COULD NOT occur as stated. The evidence backs up Zimmerman’s account. Not as conclusive evidence but as evidence that does not refute it. That’s the case.
The entire back of his head has abrasions. It’s not a couple of cuts.
You’ve seen the 911 call with the screams on it connected with witnesses who saw the fight. That would be the minimum time Martin was on top of Zimmerman. Add in what you think is appropriate for someone to dial the phone after witnessing the beginning of the fight.
Martin was a troubled youth on his 3rd suspension. He was involved in an assault which far exceeded a simple punch in the nose. He did what he did and no amount of hyperbole adjectives attached to him as a debate tactic changes that.
Again, as has been repeated MANY TIMES by multiple people, nobody gives a shit about Z’s well-being. You and those supporting Martin cannot separate your emotions from the evidence. It’s been nothing but page after page of imaginary scenarios without any evidence to support them.
If you have a scenario you think is worth mentioning then back it up with evidence.
If Martin wanted to get away from Zimmerman, he could have easily kept going east, instead of south along the path, then walked south, which would have taken him to Brandi’s front door. With a head start, Zimmerman could never have caught him. But than Zimmerman wasn’t following anyone. He was on the phone with the dispatcher. Once the dispatcher told him they didn’t want him following, his breathing returned to normal, indicating he stopped moving. If you don’t believe it, have someone talk to you over the cellphone while you’re running, than reply to what they’re saying. This is one of the reasons why the SPD couldn’t arrest him. They couldn’t refute the laws of nature and add their own emotional desires to the evidence.
If we knew exactly where he got out of his car, we could go about trying to establish just how far he travelled after leaving his vehicle. Got any factual evidence that proves he parked where he said, or is that another Zimmerman Defender no go area? That some of you are making pronouncements about Zimmerman’s actions without even knowing this relevant point for sure, seems to suggest a lot about your impartiality.
Well to start with you don’t know to the second how long he ran, or how fast he was running.
What we do know is that both lost sight of each other which puts Martin passed the corner of the NW building. We know from Dee Dee’s testimony that it was a couple minutes until the confrontation after losing sight of Zimmerman. We have a good idea from the flashlight location and witness testimony where Zimmerman was when the fight started.
What theory are you working on now?
Zimmerman got out of his vehicle soon after Martin started running. Since the flashlight was found at the top of the T, and the fact Zimmerman was clicking the other one, he certainly had to be close to where the police car was parked in the reenactment video. That is, if he walked, since there doesn’t appear to be too much difference in the time it took to reach the T. Of course, he could have run full bore from a further distance, but considering his obesity, and sacroilliitis, inflammation of the lower joints, fast walking is probably about it for him.
Z said that his lights shone into the area between the rows. So his vehicle would have had top’ve been about where the PD vehicle stopped in the re-enactment.
LOL.
1st That kind of inflammation, when it’s chronic can present differently on different days. Some days being more tolerable than others.
2nd The only reports I have read about Z having that sort of condition, it was acute, not chronic and was listed a a result of his altercation with M. If I am not mistaken, that means Z did not have that sort of inflammation before the altercation w/ M. If I am wrong, please let me know. Where did you come across the info that Z had a “bad back” rather than an injured back? [chronic condition vs an acute one resulting from a recent injury]
3rd Z didn’t appear to be so heavy that he couldn’t jog a couple hundred feet.
So, Dee Dee’s testimony is reliable now, is it? Do you really believe there are no significant inconsistencies between Z’s description of events during his nen call and his reenactment the following day?
Not telling. I’ll throw another something into the mix to ponder on, instead.
Have a listen to Z’s nen call here at 3.20 and you’ll hear him say to the dispatcher “They’ll see my truck.” Immediately after it you’ll hear Z say in a much lower voice than he’s used all throughout his call, something like “The keys are in my truck.”
Who is he addressing this remark to, if indeed that is what he said? It certainly doesn’t sound like he’s talking to the dispatcher, after all, why would the dispatcher need to know that?
Shouldn’t a decent audio expert be able to stablish exactly what was said. and if he says what it sounds like he says, would that give you pause for thought?
If Z made the call at the clubhouse and left his engine running, could we expect to hear it? What about when it’s moving? When TM passed him at the clubhouse, he’d have had to make at least 2 gear changes to continue following him around onto Twin Trees Lane. Is this a testament to the silence of Z’s 4x4’s engine and transmission?
It’s a form of arthritis, deterioration of the spine, which takes time to develop.You can’t get it overnight.
Would please you cite your source for Zimmerman being afflicted thusly?
fw ever iw the staff at the Mayo clinic seem to have a different idea than you do about sacroiliitis.
CausesBy Mayo Clinic staff
A wide range of factors or events may cause sacroiliac joint dysfunction, including:
Traumatic injury. A sudden impact, such as a motor vehicle accident or a fall, can damage your sacroiliac joints.
So, if you would, could you please provide your source for saying that Zimmerman is afflicted with some form of degenerative arthritis?
As I have said I have only seen the report which indicated that Z suffered from an acute bout of back pain brought on by his ordeal on that night in Feb.
Dee Dee has all the verbal skills of a 7 year old and that’s being kind. I’ve read her testimony at least 30 times. It’s impossible to follow any coherent line of thought from her. As to what to believe or not believe that’s a function of logic. If she remembers something Martin said she won’t know the exact words but probably is close to recalling his general conversation. If he said he was at a store then we can conclude he was referring to the 7-eleven. If she heard him say he ran to the “mail thing” he’s probably talking about the mail kiosk next to the community Center. But when she says she hears “grass” then that’s an interpretation of the sounds she heard. So to summarize, her testimony about what was said to her is probably more relevant than her interpretation of sounds.
And yes, there are no inconsistencies in Z’s description of the major points of his version of events.
uh huh. You can’t be bothered with your last theory and you want us to jump to your next one.
He doesn’t say it in a lower voice, he’s talked over on the recording by the Dispatcher. He’s talking to the Dispatcher.
Yet again you’ve thrown something on the wall to see if it sticks and left out the relevance or theory to discuss.