Witnesses tell FBI that George Zimmerman is no racist

[kelvinf]

I don’t think it is at all insulting for someone to rationalize the trauma of a horrific event by turning to God. Would it be just as insulting to you if someone who lost a child in car accident made the same statement? Or can only those who suffer a direct loss be anguished by this event? It seems insulting to me to attack someone for trying to rationalize their grief by turning to God. Where would you have them turn?

Do I agree with him? Not particularly – but I cannot fathom for the life of me how anyone can be insulted by a grieving person turning to our Lord to rationalize such a stressful event. Happens every day – just look at the interviews of the many widows and others who have lost loved ones – even if it was the result of their own free will. Or better yet, those who have used weapons in self-defense – in less controversial situations of course.

Trayvon was not committing any crime when Zimmerman left his car and followed him because he was acting suspicious by walking under the ran… (although it was not weird for him to follow Trayvon under the rain ). Him hunting Trayvon finally led to him killing Trayvon. Saying that it was God’s plan is insulting. Just like tailing someone with a car for no good reason and eventually knocking the person down to death would be troubling to say it was God’s plan.

 

[scipio337]

Trayvon was not committing any crime when Zimmerman left his car and followed him because he was acting suspicious by walking under the ran… (although it was not weird for him to follow Trayvon under the rain ). Him hunting Trayvon finally led to him killing Trayvon. Saying that it was God’s plan is insulting. Just like tailing someone with a car for no good reason and eventually knocking the person down to death would be troubling to say it was God’s plan.

Hannity> Do you feel you wouldn’t be here for this interview if you didn’t have that gun?
Zimmerman> No Sir!
Hannity> You feel you would not be here?
Zimmerman> I feel that it was all God’s plan…

He wasn’t saying that him “hunting” and killing Trayvon Martin was part of “God’s Plan”, it was that it was God’s Plan for him to have the gun, otherwise he feels he would not have lived to have the interview.

ie, “It was part of God’s plan that I had my seatbelt on yesterday, otherwise, I wouldn’t be here to type this”.

 

[eternalrest]

He wasn’t saying that him “hunting” and killing Trayvon Martin was part of “God’s Plan”, it was that it was God’s Plan for him to have the gun, otherwise he feels he would not have lived to have the interview.

ie, “It was part of God’s plan that I had my seatbelt on yesterday, otherwise, I wouldn’t be here to type this”.

Interesting that you omit the first part of what was posted. Does someone have a desire to excuse/pooh-pooh a horrific act of violence?

Hannity> Is there anything you regret? Do you regret getting out of the car, to follow Trayvon that night?
Zimmerman> No Sir!

It was ALL “God’s Plan”. Sure, the plan of the God who sent Jesus to die on the Cross for OUR sins, not Jesus’s sins, when Jesus had all the power of the angels in Heaven, who put the ear of the armed guard back on the guard when Peter cut it off…??

 

[eternalrest]

Well the obvious falsity here would be the use of the term “murderer” – unless of course he has already been convicted of a crime someplace other than in your mind.

From Dr. Alveda King, niece of Rev. Martin Luther King

And certainly Trayvon Martin, a young man cut down in his prime – I would say because of my ministry ‘aborted late,’ a late abortion – now his dreams are dead.

Perhaps you should write her and tell her that you think her comparison of the murder of Trayvon Martin to the murder of unborn babies (and these doctors aren’t convicted either) is inappropriate or some sort of “falsity.”

 

[scipio337]

Interesting that you omit the first part of what was posted. Does someone have a desire to excuse/pooh-pooh a horrific act of violence?

It was ALL “God’s Plan”. Sure, the plan of the God who sent Jesus to die on the Cross for OUR sins, not Jesus’s sins, when Jesus had all the power of the angels in Heaven, who put the ear of the armed guard back on the guard when Peter cut it off…??

“What part of my post wasn’t factual?”

And I reject your implicit insult.

The Catechism supports self defense, see 2263 - 2267.

We may differ on our view of the events, but that doesn’t give you license to create a strawman that I would excuse acts of violence.

 

[eternalrest]

“What part of my post wasn’t factual?”

And I reject your implicit insult.

The Catechism supports self defense, see 2263 - 2267.

We may differ on our view of the events, but that doesn’t give you license to create a strawman that I would excuse acts of violence.

You are repeatedly arguing that this case should never have had a full investigation. Without a full investigation, witnesses would never have been interviewed, including Trayvon Martin’s girlfriend, Mary Crutcher, many others who wanted to tell their story and were prevented by the police, who shared your view. That is excusing an act of violence. It is already harder to figure out if Zimmerman is lying or not since DNA samples were never taken from his clothing the day that he killed Trayvon Martin.

You are also arguing interpretations for his statements that don’t fit with the facts, stretching what evidence is there to continue arguing that a full investigation is unnecessary. That also seems to be providing excuses for violence.

Lawyers: Video contradicts Zimmerman’s account in fatal shooting of Trayvon
About The Tribune-Review
The Tribune-Review can be reached via e-mail or at 412-321-6460.

By The Associated Press

Published: Friday, June 22, 2012, 12:01 a.m.
Updated: Friday, June 22, 2012

ORLANDO — George Zimmerman appears believable when he re-enacts for police what he said led to the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin, but some of his statements are questionable, lawyers who reviewed the footage said Thursday.

Even a detective who interrogated the neighborhood-watch leader pointed out inconsistencies in his story — particularly Zimmerman’s claim that Martin punched him and slammed his head onto the ground although the teen had no prior history of violence.

The video and audio tapes released by Zimmerman’s attorney provide his client’s most detailed account yet of what led to the Feb. 26 shooting; however, the tapes don’t answer whether the shooting was justified.

The evidence was released almost a week before Zimmerman’s second bond hearing on a second-degree murder charge, and on the heels of unflattering telephone calls capturing Zimmerman and his wife talking in code about using money collected for a defense fund to pay credit cards.

Zimmerman claims he shot the unarmed 17-year-old Martin in self-defense, under Florida’s “stand your ground” law. Martin’s parents said Zimmerman was the aggressor. Martin had only a bag of Skittles and an iced tea on him when he died.

Criminal defense lawyers who reviewed the video for The Associated Press and have no connection to the case said some parts don’t add up.

Zimmerman claimed Martin confronted him after the neighborhood-watch leader gave up searching for him and was walking back to his truck. But there doesn’t appear to be a place to hide in the area where Zimmerman says Martin suddenly appeared, said Orlando defense attorney David Hill.

triblive.com/usworld/nation/2073874-74/zimmerman-martin-account-defense-lawyers-shooting-video-attorney-trayvon-associated

 

[scipio337]

You are repeatedly arguing that this case should never have had a full investigation… triblive.com/usworld/nation/2073874-74/zimmerman-martin-account-defense-lawyers-shooting-video-attorney-trayvon-associated

Great.

Now please point out to the post where I stated there never should have been a full investigation.

(or that I " desire to excuse/pooh-pooh a horrific act of violence")

 

[eternalrest]

Great.

Now please point out to the post where I stated there never should have been a full investigation.

(or that I " desire to excuse/pooh-pooh a horrific act of violence")

It seemed that you were complaining about the investigation and calling the current investigation a “show trial.”

There have been 212 murders in Chicago since February.

homicides.redeyechicago.com/date/2012/

How many do you think received a local police, state dept of law enforcement, grand jury, special prosecutor, Justice Dept AND FBI investigations?

BTW, there was an investigation, and as this show trial will show, charges should have never been brought.

 

[eternalrest]

When the FBI AND the Justice Department both show as much interest in investigating black on white “hate crime” (like what is going on rampantly in Chicago) or even better…black on black hate crime, then I will give this dog and pony show a little more credibility.

Then you defended this statement.

As for pooh-pooh act of violence, you argue that we should accept Zimmerman’s word as true, even though it doesn’t match up with the available evidence regarding places for Trayvon Martin to hide, it is not consistent with either Zimmerman or Trayvon’s history of aggression, Zimmerman has repeatedly been proven to lie in extremely similar situations (both when he assaulted the police officer and regarding his funds recently), and it does not match up with the girlfriend’s statements (and the girlfriend’s phone call records match up minute to minute with the 911 calls). You seem to think that Zimmerman was justified in his actions of senselessly taking someone’s life. The possibility exists that it was genuine self-defense but seems unlikely, and there definitely exists reason to question Zimmerman’s story.

The word “pooh-pooh”: "to express contempt for or impatience about; make light of: " It does seem that many in this thread are making light of Zimmerman’s violent behavior.

 

[scipio337]

It seemed that you were complaining about the investigation and calling the current investigation a “show trial.”

No, I called the trial a “show trial”, and contended their already was an investigation.

Usually, there is evidence of mishandling a police investigation (ie, FBI determines) before another investigation is garnered.

I can expect your retraction?

 

[scipio337]

Then you defended this statement.

As for pooh-pooh act of violence, you argue that we should accept Zimmerman’s word as true, even though it doesn’t match up with the available evidence regarding places for Trayvon Martin to hide, it is not consistent with either Zimmerman or Trayvon’s history of aggression, Zimmerman has repeatedly been proven to lie in extremely similar situations (both when he assaulted the police officer and regarding his funds recently), and it does not match up with the girlfriend’s statements (and the girlfriend’s phone call records match up minute to minute with the 911 calls). You seem to think that Zimmerman was justified in his actions of senselessly taking someone’s life. The possibility exists that it was genuine self-defense but seems unlikely, and there definitely exists reason to question Zimmerman’s story.

The word “pooh-pooh”: "to express contempt for or impatience about; make light of: " It does seem that many in this thread are making light of Zimmerman’s violent behavior.

No, as someone who has actually been shot at, I don’t make light of that behavior, and the fact that I think it may have been justified doesn’t mean I take it lightly.

When can I expect your retraction?

 

[kelvinf]

He wasn’t saying that him “hunting” and killing Trayvon Martin was part of “God’s Plan”, it was that it was God’s Plan for him to have the gun, otherwise he feels he would not have lived to have the interview.

ie, “It was part of God’s plan that I had my seatbelt on yesterday, otherwise, I wouldn’t be here to type this”.

We can interpret it differently but as I said, no matter how we interpret it, it still boils down to the fact that, it was because of him carrying a gun and following Trayvon that night that led to Trayvon’s death. So interpreting his statement as meaning it was God’s plan to carry the gun is no different from saying that it was God’s plan to kill Trayvon. Because that was the result of him carrying the gun that night. Causality!?

If you didn’t put on your safey belt and you killed someone with your car would you claim that it was God’s plan?

As Christians, we should understand better that not everything can be attributed to God, especially where we judged poorly.

Prudence would have permitted him not to carry a gun outside the home (as it seems to be the recommendation), not to follow a suspicious person and to follow instructions from dispatchers.

 

[kelvinf]

I believe Zimmerman has a very good lawyer, Mark O’Mara. I believe he performed very well during the very first trial.

However, Zimmerman hide information from him and together with his wife they lied to the court under oath. Now, his wife is also in trouble.

Unfortunately, Trayvon is not here to tell us his on narration of what happened that night. But based on everything we now know about Zimmerman (i.e. including his past record), he doesn’t seem like someone to trust.

He told 911 that Trayvon was “running”. But he now admits Trayvon wasn’t actually running. Maybe this is something little or maybe not.(?)

But all this is too much to trust him.

 

[estesbob]

We can interpret it differently but as I said, no matter how we interpret it, it still boils down to the fact that, it was because of him carrying a gun and following Trayvon that night that led to Trayvon’s death. So interpreting his statement as meaning it was God’s plan to carry the gun is no different from saying that it was God’s plan to kill Trayvon. Because that was the result of him carrying the gun that night. Causality!?

If you didn’t put on your safey belt and you killed someone with your car would you claim that it was God’s plan?

As Christians, we should understand better that not everything can be attributed to God, especially where we judged poorly.

Prudence would have permitted him not to carry a gun outside the home (as it seems to be the recommendation), not to follow a suspicious person and to follow instructions from dispatchers.

So if it is true that Zimmeran was on top of him and he feared for his life what should he have done? I

 

[eternalrest]

No, I called the trial a “show trial”, and contended their already was an investigation.

Usually, there is evidence of mishandling a police investigation (ie, FBI determines) before another investigation is garnered.

I can expect your retraction?

No, the current investigation should go on, because the former one was mishandled. That’s why it took… 44… days before he was arrested and substantive protests.

 

[livingwordunity]

The trouble with cable news–or really any news–now, is that stories are never given time to develop. Everyone must have an opinion within 5 minutes of an event.

And Obama was no exception. By the way, Obama giving his opinion as president of the United States without knowing the facts also guaranteed that Zimmerman would not get a fair trail.

 

[eternalrest]

Could I have an apology for the rude posts towards me, i.e. calling my words “weasel-words” or saying that my morality is “inconsistent”? You have been reported for lack of charitable behavior.

And for those who call the people who led the protests for the new investigations, a “race-baiting pimp” and “race-baiting fool?”: Why is it even allowed to insult people so rampantly on a Catholic forum? That is uncharitable as well, and it is extremely sad that this sort of name-calling is so rampant and accepted here.

 

[eternalrest]

You posted the blog as fact as support of your own outlandish claims, and charges of foul play:

Namely, that the fact that a personal friend of Zimmerman’s is a former sheriff and the fact that Zimmerman had previous (critical, and unrelated) contact with the Sanford Police department somehow suggested a police cover-up, or that Zimmerman was coached.

Your blog link made the same jump to conclusion.

http://www.jeffdurso.com/images/Jump2Conclusions.jpg

This poster posts more insults, calling my words “outlandish.” Rudeness is against forum rules.

 

[seekerz]

Are you going to deny that God had a role in it? If God didn’t have a role in this, what other things does He simply ignore because He is too busy?

I never denied that God had a role in it. What I said was, when in doubt blame God. I can think of any number of tragedies and daily loss of life where people would be outraged if anyone were to suggest that what played out was God’s will. Just because God may not intervene directly in a sequence of events, DOES NOT make the events God’s will.

 

[seekerz]

Did you listen to the interview? That was not even remotely the context of the comment.

Yes, I listened to the interview. He said he does not regret the main things he did that night (such as following the kid with a gun) and then proclaimed that he believes that "it was all’ God’s will. So pray tell what other “context” I have missed.