Let us be honest. The facts are that a thug wannabe violently attacked an innocent man without any moral cause. The man had illegal drugs in him and had a history of bad behavior. He was kicked out of school for bad behavior at the time he violently attacked an innocent man. Instead of calling 911 he spoke with a girl and they talked about gay rape. In what way is any of this reasonable?Please present the facts that support your claim.
Aggressor? Walking in the same vicinity of someone and speaking with that someone, asking a question, makes one an aggressor?'… Zimmerman was the initial aggressor…
That depends on who you talk to. Apparently, some think it is that very thing, black and white, a race issue, which is the only reason it happened because Zimmerman is a racist. I disagree because the facts don’t bear that idea out.'…It’s really not as black and white as some make this out to be.
Not assumptions, but fact. Zimmerman’s injuries and witness testimony bear that out.What aggression by GZ? What did he do that required a life threatening violent attack by TM?
Robert Sock;10990750:
Assumptions!
TM may have feared for his life and we don’t have his testimony. We have no clue what Zimmerman said to him. It’s completely his testimony and he’s been untruthful with the initial bond hearing and the amount of money he had to the I don’t know anything about the defense laws etc. I don’t find him remotely credible so hence it’s fair to have on opinion different from yours. The key part of the incident is missing its voice, TM.Bolding mine above. It is not acceptable to beat someone merely because they ask a question, and a reasonable question at that.
Just a few: The maxim of turning the other check; The maxim of loving your neighbor as yourself; the maxim of giving someone your cloak too when they ask for your tunic.The jury’s verdict of not guilty.
Please list the virtues you think are missing on this thread.
You would rather give a government official the power to pick and choose which citizen’s they deem worthy of having rights and be able to deny someone those rights without due process?It’s a complete disgrace; a young innocent man dead for walking in the rain. GZ was not the type of person who should have had a gun. I disagree that those who note his
previous issues of domestic abuse, having a restraining order against him for “trolling
around the neighborhood” and assaulting a police officer are of no import.
Granted he may have had alcohol problems but not everyone is violent when they are drinking.
Fact at that moment yes but what if TM had seen the gun, was scared to death for being followed and feared for his own life. He would at that point have the same right to defend his own life; you can’t solve the entire puzzle with a huge missing piece.Not assumptions, but fact. Zimmerman’s injuries and witness testimony bear that out.
Kinda hard for Zimmerman to remember that when he’s having his head bashed in by Treyvon. The entire situation is tragic, but in the end, the jury got the verdict right, espeically when the prosecution’s witness’ were helping the defense.Just a few: The maxim of turning the other check; The maxim of loving your neighbor as yourself; the maxim of giving someone your cloak too when they ask for your tunic.
This isn’t the perfect case with a videotaped recording of every move. There are gaps, there are witness statements agreed.’
That someone disagrees with you does not mean they don’t have the facts.
They may have the same facts and simply disagree with some of your perception of the facts. Zimmerman was the initial aggressor.
There are many that do not feel Zimmerman in an way was responsible for how this ended
and some disagree with that. It’s really not as black and white as some make this out to be.
Why are you purposely misrepresenting the facts? He isn’t dead because he was innocently walking in the rain. He is dead because he was pounding another mans head into concrete. He was not shot while just walking around minding his own business, which is what you are implying.It’s a complete disgrace; a young innocent man dead for walking in the rain. GZ was not the type of person who should have had a gun. I disagree that those who note his
previous issues of domestic abuse, having a restraining order against him for “trolling
around the neighborhood” and assaulting a police officer are of no import.
Granted he may have had alcohol problems but not everyone is violent when they are drinking.
If Martin feared for his life, why did he not run? Hide and stay hidden in the dark? Go home? Go to any home with a light on, ask for help? Call the police with the phone in his hand or ask his friend to do so, rather than just keep talking with his friend?TM may have feared for his life and we don’t have his testimony. …
True, but it is more reasonable to briefly answer the question as to why you are in a neighborhood that is not your own and not give much information beyond “I’m visiting” rather than attack someone.…No one is required to answer a question from a man who has been following you and doesn’t even have the least amount of sense to identify themselves as Neighborhood Watch.
Even so, TM has no “duty” to answer any ? from Zimmerman.
Martin fled. He lost contact with Zimmerman. He could have continued home. He didntTM may have feared for his life and we don’t have his testimony. We have no clue what Zimmerman said to him. It’s completely his testimony and he’s been untruthful with the initial bond hearing and the amount of money he had to the I don’t know anything about the defense laws etc. I don’t find him remotely credible so hence it’s fair to have on opinion different from yours. The key part of the incident is missing its voice, TM.
That doesn’t mean we don’t accept the verdict.
No one is required to answer a question from a man who has been following you and doesn’t even have the least amount of sense to identify themselves as Neighborhood Watch.
Even so, TM has no “duty” to answer any ? from Zimmerman.
Very true. The idea that this attacker was some innocent kid is absurd. Innocent kids do not have his history, do not have drugs in them, and do not talk on the phone with a girl and discuss “crack ahs” and gay rape when he should be on the phone with 911.This isn’t the perfect case with a videotaped recording of every move. There are gaps, there are witness statements agreed.
But everything that IS known comports with GZ’s account. The forensic evidence by the ME puts Martin above and leaning over GZ. This corroborates not only GZ’s testimony but also that of the witness. Martin did not have any injuries indicating he was attacked by GZ. Instead he had injuries consistent with being the attacker. GZ had injuries consistent with being the victim of Martin’s attack.
I am not “interpreting” or making things up such as the specious statements that Martin was this innocent kid walking home with an ice tea and Skittles when gunned down in cold blood. THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE OF THIS RIDICULOUS SCENARIO. But again to idealogues the facts do not matter.
Again I think the only reason that the Martin as Innocent Kid crowd is clinging to their story is that they are anti-gun or believe that GZ was a racist. There are no fact supporting their story so they are restorting to claims about decades old allegations, statements by former lovers (we all know how credible those can be!) and grand assumptions that everyone carrying a gun is de facto a predator.
Give me some RELEVANT facts and I’ll listen. Supposition, assumption and fabrication are not very convincing
Lisa
I would rather have a police officer trained in such matters to handle “suspects” and those “up to no good.” Especially given the robberies in the neighborhood seems to have heightened Zimmerman’s agitation level. That said he has trolled around before… TM was not guilty of those robberies but he paid the price due to the profiling with his life.You would rather give a government official the power to pick and choose which citizen’s they deem worthy of having rights and be able to deny someone those rights without due process?
That’s George Zimmernan’s story alright.Innocent people do not bang other people’s heads into cement. That is a grave injustice.
Concealed carriers are one of the most law abiding segments of society. People have a right to self defense. Why do you insist that people be disarmed and at the mercy of someone stronger or bigger than them?Are you inferring that the high crime rate will be magically eliminated by allowing gunslinging vigilantes the right to carry concealed weapons? The crime rate will only escalate, with innocent people like TM being shoot dead. Calling the TM case self defense is a misnomer. It’s manslaughter.
The young man who said you are gonna die tonight? That young man?I would rather have a police officer trained in such matters to handle “suspects” and those “up to no good.” Especially given the robberies in the neighborhood seems to have heightened Zimmerman’s agitation level. That said he has trolled around before… TM was not guilty of those robberies but he paid the price due to the profiling with his life.
The HOA had to settle the Wrongful Death suit of TM with TM’s family for their irresponsible “endorsement” of GZ in newsletters. He was not trained to get out of his
car with a gun and confront someone. That’s for the police who made it EXPLICITLY clear they don’t need citizens following people around, " We don’t NEED you to do that."
Don’t do it to begin with hopefully everyone knows now. I doubt it will happen again a young man is killed by some citizen who believes he is the law.
Yes, the guy with the head injuries.That’s George Zimmernan’s story alright.
Facts cannot penetrate ideology.Not assumptions, but fact. Zimmerman’s injuries and witness testimony bear that out.
I think it also has a lot to do with the professional grievance crowd and the street theater easily angered minorities actors trying to hustle money from overly emotion low information white guilt crowd. There must be big money to be made off TM death/GZ racist narrative then we can imagine.This isn’t the perfect case with a videotaped recording of every move. There are gaps, there are witness statements agreed.
But everything that IS known comports with GZ’s account. The forensic evidence by the ME puts Martin above and leaning over GZ. This corroborates not only GZ’s testimony but also that of the witness. Martin did not have any injuries indicating he was attacked by GZ. Instead he had injuries consistent with being the attacker. GZ had injuries consistent with being the victim of Martin’s attack.
I am not “interpreting” or making things up such as the specious statements that Martin was this innocent kid walking home with an ice tea and Skittles when gunned down in cold blood. THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE OF THIS RIDICULOUS SCENARIO. But again to idealogues the facts do not matter.
Again I think the only reason that the Martin as Innocent Kid crowd is clinging to their story is that they are anti-gun or believe that GZ was a racist. There are no fact supporting their story so they are restorting to claims about decades old allegations, statements by former lovers (we all know how credible those can be!) and grand assumptions that everyone carrying a gun is de facto a predator.
Give me some RELEVANT facts and I’ll listen. Supposition, assumption and fabrication are not very convincing
Lisa