Seriously. Take a step back and breathe. You’re getting hysterical. Even more so than you usually are. Stop reading your own fears into testimony that isn’t actually there.
Recall what, wrongly? It was in the taped interview at the station. Det Cerino told gz his height and weight and then tms height and weight, and he stated " he was a skinny kid" and then said how you know how that looks, people will want answers
Tollhouse, I don’t think any perverted fantasy was involved on GZ’s part. Perhaps a super-cop fantasy though??? The historical evidence suggests impulse control is not GZ’s strong suit.
I cant take your debate as remotely legit anymore, you dismiss any witnesses who do NOT say gz is a shining example and a boy scout. You arrogantly dismiss any witness who dares dash your fantasy that gz is perhaps less wonderful than you need to believe he is
And I would like a cite that he told Dee Dee he was scared.
There’s a sizeable excluded middle between “shining example boy scout” and “evil child molesting pervert”. Although there’s more evidence for the former…
I don’t see a smiley-face icon. You can’t be serious, can you?
Where did the “child pervert” come from?
He actually was the only one being racist ( according to the witness ) with the “cracker” comment.
Perhaps you are “profiling” Zimmerman and we all know that is Bad Bad Bad now!
Anyway, it DOESN’T MATTER if he lied about something. The jury believed he was in fear for his life from someone that was beating him.
Tollhouse, still waiting for that cite that Martin told his girlfriend he was scared.
He’s serious. There’s a whole bunch of Internetters out there who theorize that Trayvon ran home to change clothing/drop off all his drugs and ill-gotten gains/announce his plans to kill Zimmerman to family members before returning to the scene of his death. Admittedly, this is the first time I’ve seen anyone specifically mention weapons built into shoes. It makes total sense though. Trayvon is the kind of James Bondian villain who announces his next dastardly move prior to making it (as in helpfully telling George “You’re going to die tonight” instead of just killing him), so of course he has shoe-weapons.
He’s also completely wrong. Anyone comparing the shoes on the corpse to the shoes shown on the 7-11 security video can see that they are the same shoes.
And you make up claims like the one in which you said that Zimmerman only has one friend: a racist!
What about that?
If you need to actually invent facts to support your argument, how strong can its reality be?
“Mounting him?” What, was Trayvon in full rut? Was it his season?
Zimmerman’s big mistake was his pheromones, maybe?
What is it about this case that makes people simply manufacture their own facts?
(Others have adequately addressed the shoes nonsense.)
After all this time, it suddenly occurred to me that I’ve a friend (now deceased) who once suffered an incident with similarities to GZ’s.
He was in a bar (in State of Washington?) and was jumped by two guys. (My friend was a righteous guy but sometimes made rude or snide comments.) Outnumbered and getting hurt, he pulled a knife in self-defense and cut one or both assaulters. Police arrested him, saying in effect whoever uses a knife in a fist fight is at fault. In jail unable to make bail, he learned one was in critical condition and he might be charged with homicide. He was relieved when the guy recovered; he pled guilty to a lesser assault charge and was released for time served (or some such outcome). The alternative, pleading not guilty, would have left him in jail and charged with a worse-degree assault.
What are the differences between GZ’s case and that of my friend?
[ul][li] With no Internet support and no money my friend was faced with the choice of jail with public defender, or guilty plea.[/li][li] GZ is an obvious asshole. I knew my friend well; he was a very kind and righteous guy.[/li][li] GZ left no living witnesses.[/li][/ul]
I don’t know what conclusion to draw, but was suddenly struck by the similarity.
What were the laws in Washington at the time concerning self-defense and a duty to retreat?
IANAL. I might have a 50-50 chance of guessing which decade the incident occurred in (he and I met in middle age and exchanged life anecdotes). But I don’t think “duty to retreat” is relevant: it was two-on-one intent on beating him.
And am I wrong that a guy with legal classes and thousands of dollars coming in via Internet is better placed than a naïf reliant on arbitrary public defender?
“Mounting” in this context means that Travyon had knocked Zimmy down and was kneeling astride him, much as though riding a horse, meaning that he had his weight on the guy but his own torso was still more or less upright, allowing him the leverage to beat his supine, pinned opponent.
Whether those are the facts of the case isn’t for me to determine, but that’s what’s meant by “mounting” here.
:rolleyes:
I can’t tell any difference between the shoes from the 7-11 video and those in the death photo. In the 7-11 video Trayvon’s pants cover the top of his shoes. In the death photo you can see some red - not sure if it is part of the shoes or his socks.
And I don’t recall Zimmerman testifying to being kicked or stomped in any way.
I wonder if the one friend thing comes from Mark Osterbman’s original interview with police. Osterman said he was Zimmerman’s best friend and that he didn’t know of any other friends.
Even if that’s so, the “friend” tollhouse is referring to is not Osterman, but Taafe.