Witnesses tell FBI that George Zimmerman is no racist

[mtbender]

I have read that he had injuries. I have read nothing definitive that indicates when or where those injuries were sustained, other than Zimmerman’s version of the altercation.

Do you also question when and where Martin was shot then – because based on fact all we know is that he was shot – and it is Zimmerman’s own testimony that says he shot him? Since we already discounted anything Zimmerman said - at what point would it be accepted as fact that Zimmerman shot Martin?

 

[kelvinf]

Do you also question when and where Martin was shot then – because based on fact all we know is that he was shot – and it is Zimmerman’s own testimony that says he shot him? Since we already discounted anything Zimmerman said - at what point would it be accepted as fact that Zimmerman shot Martin?

Forensic identification? The bulllet, gun, owner, shooter…All that should obviously have been done by the police. Identifying him as the shooter isn’t based on him simply saying so. There is evidence, I believe.

 

[mtbender]

He never said anything about “chasing” him, he was watching him and following him. When the 911 operator told him to stop, …he said “okay”. There is no, none, zero, zip evidence which points to Zimmerman starting the altercation or doing anything but be dutiful neighborhood watch person…in a neighborhood that had experienced no less than 8 separate break-ins in the preceding months.

The girlfriend’s testimony would kind of support this – when Martin indicated to his girlfriend that he lost Zimmerman and Martin stopped running. The question – which we don’t have an answer to, is where did Martin go next?

What I find interesting is that Martin – if running as presume – did not make it to his father’s girlfriend’s house in the 5 minutes (Zimmerman was asked at 7:11 if he was following Martin, the first call to indicate the fight was at 7:16) from when Zimmerman indicated he was running to when the 911 a separate 911 call indicated a fight. Looking at a map – we are talking a little over 300 yards from the clubhouse to where he was staying – going the long way. (About 10 minute miles for a young football player) Yet the shooting happened only about 150 yards from Zimmerman’s truck… (About a 20 minute mile for this young athlete)

Could be noting, but I find it interesting that Zimmerman and Martin’s girlfriend’s testimony both support that claim that Zimmerman was trailing Martin and lost him. It gives a lot more credit to Zimmerman’s claim that Martin may have double back after losing him…

 

[vz71]

Forensic identification? The bulllet, gun, owner, shooter…All that should obviously have been done by the police. Identifying him as the shooter isn’t based on him simply saying so. There is evidence, I believe.

From what I have read, there has been no forensic testing done.

It was accepted that Zimmerman shot Trayvon based upon his word, the blood on Zimmerman, his gun, and the fact that Trayvon was shot.

So it does make for an interesting quirk of logic.
Without Zimmerman’s word, we really have no way to know at this stage in the game.

So do we discount Zimmerman’s word or not?

 

[mtbender]

Forensic identification? The bulllet, gun, owner, shooter…All that should obviously have been done by the police. Identifying him as the shooter isn’t based on him simply saying so. There is evidence, I believe.

Not until well after the event – and although I am sure it was done, I have yet to see any ballistics evidence released or discussed– yet this was never called into question… My point is that most people use common sense to correlate the facts and paint a picture. Zimmerman was there with a gun and said he shot him. That was enough to make the assertion. The injuries to Zimmerman were consistent with his claims, medical reports and the eye witness accounts therefore there is enough evidence to draw the conclusion that they occurred that night. To assert that Zimmerman’s injuries are unassociated seems disingenuous – but I would love to hear the prosecutors argue that one…

 

[kelvinf]

From what I have read, there has been no forensic testing done.

It was accepted that Zimmerman shot Trayvon based upon his word, the blood on Zimmerman, his gun, and the fact that Trayvon was shot.

So it does make for an interesting quirk of logic.
Without Zimmerman’s word, we really have no way to know at this stage in the game.

So do we discount Zimmerman’s word or not?

Not until well after the event – and although I am sure it was done, I have yet to see any ballistics evidence released or discussed– yet this was never called into question…

So does it make sense that the police were critised for not doing a proper investigation?

 

[mtbender]

So does it make sense that the police were critised for not doing a proper investigation?

Not based on this line of discussion…

 

[vz71]

So does it make sense that the police were critised for not doing a proper investigation?

I am not certain it was not proper.

With an admissable confession as well as reasonable evidence, the officer could conclude who was shot and by whom.

This same reasonable evidence indicates a beating to have taken place.
Together with the emergency call and eye-witness testimony, the officers handed over the evidence they had accumulated and no charges were pursued.

People started claiming the officers mishanded the investigation later on.
Well after the media latched onto this and started misreporting the facts in order to sensationalize the story.

While I would agree that the investigation was not as extensive as it could have been, one has to also consider if the investigation was as extensive as it needed to be.
Not every crime requires a full forensics workup to discern what happened.

 

[seekerz]

He never said anything about “chasing” him, he was watching him and following him. When the 911 operator told him to stop, …he said “okay”. There is no, none, zero, zip evidence which points to Zimmerman starting the altercation or doing anything but be dutiful neighborhood watch person…in a neighborhood that had experienced no less than 8 separate break-ins in the preceding months.

How do you “follow” someone who is running without chasing after them?

8 break-ins are a miserable excuse for killing a person who wasn’t committing a crime.

 

[seekerz]

Other people were too busy “minding their own business” to be concerned about such minor irritants.

Compared to losing one’s life, yes a break-in in which nobody is hurt or dies is a minor irritant - unless of course one prizes possessions over people…

 

[seekerz]

Do you also question when and where Martin was shot then – because based on fact all we know is that he was shot – and it is Zimmerman’s own testimony that says he shot him? Since we already discounted anything Zimmerman said - at what point would it be accepted as fact that Zimmerman shot Martin?

That he was shot and with whose gun is easily verified without relying on Zimmerman’s word. There are no forensics I know which can identify who hit who first. There was a fight that’s all we know. Even use of the word beating suggests undue reliance on Zimmerman’s word. As far as I know, there wasn’t even a doctor’s exam that night. Who knows when Zimmerman’s nose was broken?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

How do you “follow” someone who is running without chasing after them?

8 break-ins are a miserable excuse for killing a person who wasn’t committing a crime.

8 break-ins are an excellent reason to have a diligent neighborhood watch. Treyvon Martin wasn’t killed because of break-ins. He was killed because he assaulted George Zimmerman aggressively enough that Zimmerman had no choice but to shoot him or die himself.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Compared to losing one’s life, yes a break-in in which nobody is hurt or dies is a minor irritant - unless of course one prizes possessions over people…

“Invade a home, invite a bullet” is the motto of our house. I have no idea what they intentions are of someone who breaks into my home. I have to assume that they are there to do harm to me or my family. As such, I meet force with force and the guilt for the unfortunate death of the invader passes on to him, not me. I do not share in that guilt, and the Church teaches this as part of the doctrine on “Thou Shalt Not Kill”.

 

[seekerz]

“Invade a home, invite a bullet” is the motto of our house. I have no idea what they intentions are of someone who breaks into my home. I have to assume that they are there to do harm to me or my family. As such, I meet force with force and the guilt for the unfortunate death of the invader passes on to him, not me. I do not share in that guilt, and the Church teaches this as part of the doctrine on “Thou Shalt Not Kill”.

The context of our discussion however, is not a home invasion but some vague fear that a passing stranger doing nothing wrong is somehow a threat, based on previous home invasions. That vague fear for the safety of some unknown possible victim’s material possessions can never justify taking the life of an unknown kid. Not UNLESS people value things over human life.

 

[seekerz]

8 break-ins are an excellent reason to have a diligent neighborhood watch. Treyvon Martin wasn’t killed because of break-ins. He was killed because he assaulted George Zimmerman aggressively enough that Zimmerman had no choice but to shoot him or die himself.

Zimmerman never claimed to be on Neighborhood Watch. He never even claimed to have identified himself as part of the Watch.

Trayvon was killed because a loony coward, in his own words, was intent on preventing ‘them’ from always getting away.

The story of the fight? You can believe it if you like. Personally, I’d expect to see rain fall up before I’d expect a frightened kid (according to his girlfriend) stop running away from a stranger’s direction and turn around to attack him without a weapon of any kind. I’m just kind of partial to commonsense over the word of people intimately associated with perjury.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

The context of our discussion however, is not a home invasion but some vague fear that a passing stranger doing nothing wrong is somehow a threat, based on previous home invasions. That vague fear for the safety of some unknown possible victim’s material possessions can never justify taking the life of an unknown kid. Not UNLESS people value things over human life.

You are the one who brought up break-ins. Zimmerman wasn’t carrying a weapon to defend a strangers house. He was carrying in the event he ran into a ne’er-do-well who ment to do HIM harm. Do I think Treyvon Martin went out looking for trouble? Absolutely not. I think he went out looking for iced tea and skittles. However, regardless of what Zimmerman was doing, it is obvious (to me anyway) that Martin didn’t like being followed around and when he had the opportunity to make a clean break and go back home, or call 911 (why didn’t he?) he didn’t. He went out of his way to track down Zimmerman and confront him. It is at this point that Treyvon Martin changed from prey to predator.

 

[mtbender]

That he was shot and with whose gun is easily verified without relying on Zimmerman’s word. There are no forensics I know which can identify who hit who first. There was a fight that’s all we know. Even use of the word beating suggests undue reliance on Zimmerman’s word. As far as I know, there wasn’t even a doctor’s exam that night. Who knows when Zimmerman’s nose was broken?

Just because it can be, doesn’t mean it was – I have yet to see the ballistics report that shows it was his gun… But really that wasn’t the point.

We are concluding there was a physical altercation – we know EMS and police documented injuries at the time of the fight. We know a hospital report is consistent with those reports. And we know that all those reports along with eye witness testimony substantiate Zimmerman’s claim. Does it prove who threw the first punch – no. Does it show some rather strong evidence that Zimmerman was on his back and beaten my Martin – I would say so.

We could ignore the facts and refuse to apply common sense to come to any conclusion we want on this case, but it really doesn’t change much.

 

[mtbender]

Zimmerman never claimed to be on Neighborhood Watch. He never even claimed to have identified himself as part of the Watch.

Trayvon was killed because a loony coward, in his own words, was intent on preventing ‘them’ from always getting away.

The story of the fight? You can believe it if you like. Personally, I’d expect to see rain fall up before I’d expect a frightened kid (according to his girlfriend) stop running away from a stranger’s direction and turn around to attack him without a weapon of any kind. I’m just kind of partial to commonsense over the word of people intimately associated with perjury.

In the accounts I read, his girlfriend indicated he wasn’t running away – even after she had asked him to… and I won’t restate my concerns about the running story – I addressed those in post 297. If he didn’t stop running or was that frightened why didn’t he make it home?

In the 911 tape it seems evident that Zimmer did stop running at some point – yet he still caught this young athlete…

I guess people have a different definition of commonsense these days…

 

[vz71]

The context of our discussion however, is not a home invasion but some vague fear that a passing stranger doing nothing wrong is somehow a threat, based on previous home invasions. That vague fear for the safety of some unknown possible victim’s material possessions can never justify taking the life of an unknown kid. Not UNLESS people value things over human life.

We know nothing of a ‘vague fear’ from anything reported thus far.

What resulted in the life being lost was the struggle that ensued.

 

[seekerz]

You are the one who brought up break-ins. Zimmerman wasn’t carrying a weapon to defend a strangers house. He was carrying in the event he ran into a ne’er-do-well who ment to do HIM harm. Do I think Treyvon Martin went out looking for trouble? Absolutely not. I think he went out looking for iced tea and skittles. However, regardless of what Zimmerman was doing, it is obvious (to me anyway) that Martin didn’t like being followed around and when he had the opportunity to make a clean break and go back home, or call 911 (why didn’t he?) he didn’t. He went out of his way to track down Zimmerman and confront him. It is at this point that Treyvon Martin changed from prey to predator.

The break-ins were not brought up by me. Read the thread. What was brought up by me is that it makes no sense for a kid who was running away from Zimmerman’s direction, to suddenly change course and attack a stranger unarmed. From the viewpoint of someone who shows an interest in self defense and weapons and all of that, don’t you find that supposed change (from running away to confrontation) even the least bit odd?