Trayvon Martin: Cellphone pics of guns and drugs

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Allegorical

Originally posted by Tribunal
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

I was wondering about that myself.

In 2005, Zimmerman was arrested and charged with "resisting officer with violence" and "battery of law enforcement officer." Both these felonies are considered third-degree. Due to his desperate attempts, the charges were reduced to "resisting officer without violence" and then the only remaining charge was also completely waived off when he entered an alcohol education program. In the same year (2005), Zimmerman's ex-fiance, Veronica Zuazo, filed a civil motion for a restraining order, alleging domestic violence. In retaliation, Zimmerman filed for a retraining order against Zuazo and both these claims were resolved with both restraining orders granted.

www.allvoices.com...

He doesn't have a record I guess, because he was never convicted of anything.

Trayvon was a seventeen year-old that was never arrested for anything EVER. George is well documented as your post above points out.

Trayvon was kicked out of school for his violent and disruptive tendencies, GZ was never convicted of anything.i

So? That means he's an uncivilized, idiotic thug that deserves to die? He was SUSPENDED from school for 3 days (not kicked out). Suspended from school, not sentenced to death. There is an extremely big difference there.

As for "wasn't convicted of a thing", his dad is a judge for pete's sake! Are you implying that both the police incident and the domestic violence incident were totally fictional and zimmerman was totally innocent? He was charged with multiple felonies and facing prison time twice before this case.

It doesn't matter!! What Trayvon had photos of on his phone. The fact is, he was unarmed when he was killed, and Zimmerman used unnecessary excessive force.

Trayvon was not the killer. He was not the killer or a threat just because he had photos of guns. That's like saying a man is a rapist just because he has photos of naked women on his phone.

Stick to the facts. Fact is, Trayvon was unarmed at the time that he was murdered.

reply to post by Paschar0

I think if Martin had a gun with him that night, he would have probably exercised HIS "Stand Your Ground" rights against Zimmerman. Then he would have been promptly thrown in jail for the rest of his life without a second thought. As much as people like you try to justify your side of view, you can never escape the fact that apparently a young black male is automatically guilty even after the fact that he was wrongly targeted, followed, accosted and killed. I fully expect you to reply with some backwards minded response to which I will tell you to save your breath. I have spoken my piece.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

Those cuts would have begun bleeding immediately, yes? Pray tell why the blood flow is towards the front of his head then, if he was lying on his back when they occurred?

There is thing called "gravity " that would pull the blood to the ground if you were on your back and having you head, as you were on your back, having you head slammed in the ground. Logically, in that position, you would not have blood flowing to the front of your head against gravity. Read up on this thing we call "physics."

Not one of those blood trails appears to alter the path of its flow, which hardly seems indicative of them occurring to someone who was desperately moving his head around trying to prevent it being slammed against concrete again and again.

Originally posted by Propulsion
If any of my children had a pic of a gun and some weed on their phones, I would be quite concerned! I would most definitely want to know what my kids were up too while they were out doing stuff. And if you’re not concerned, I would advise you to take some parenting skills classes.

Trayvon was walking back from the store from buying skittles and iced tea during half-time of the annual NBA All Star Game. He was unarmed and not in the possession of anything illegal, he was returning to his dads house (from where he had just left) and was NOT trespassing.

Originally posted by Propulsion

Originally posted by Allegorical

Originally posted by Propulsion
There are more powerful people who will end this case with Zimmerman being guilty. They know that if Z gets off, there will be riots never before seen in the history of America. Hundreds of Americans will be killed as a result!

Your thoughts...?

By who? All the uncivilized, idiotic, black thugs? Where will these riots happen exactly? In low income neighborhoods and ghettos across America?

(did u see what i did there??)

I would really love a real answer, do you have one? I asked four (4) questions, can you answer them?

All it takes is only two (2) word for all your questions…

Rodney King!

Need I say more…?

edit on 31-5-2013 by Propulsion because: (no reason given)

You see two words but I see a whole paragraph. I would commend you for at least admitting to your ignorant ways but i don't think you even know you have.

Originally posted by Paschar0
It also demonstrates an actual conspiracy by prosecutors and their minions, which if not for someone brave enough to come forward, we would never have learned about. Someone please explain how suppressing this evidence furthers the cause for truth and fairness in this trial?

Trials are not about truth or fairness. They are about winning, just like all games.

Originally posted by Taissa
It doesn't matter!! What Trayvon had photos of on his phone. The fact is, he was unarmed when he was killed, and Zimmerman used unnecessary excessive force.

If somebody is beating on you, there is no such thing as excessive force. Assaulting another person is essentially a request to be killed.

Originally posted by bigfootgurl

Originally posted by Taissa
It doesn't matter!! What Trayvon had photos of on his phone. The fact is, he was unarmed when he was killed, and Zimmerman used unnecessary excessive force.

If somebody is beating on you, there is no such thing as excessive force. Assaulting another person is essentially a request to be killed.

What if the assaulter was 100 pounds heavier and had a gun, what would YOU do? That is a 100% non-rhetorical REAL question.

Originally posted by bigfootgurl

Originally posted by Taissa
It doesn't matter!! What Trayvon had photos of on his phone. The fact is, he was unarmed when he was killed, and Zimmerman used unnecessary excessive force.

If somebody is beating on you, there is no such thing as excessive force. Assaulting another person is essentially a request to be killed.

No it isn't. If a 10 year old comes towards you and kicks you really hard in the shin, is that a request to be killed? Self-defence isn't a strictly black and white issue - there are lots of variables that come into play when determining the validity of a claim.

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by Paschar0
Link

Drudge posted this link also.

This is pretty much what I expected from vile prosecutors and LE who seem to think lying by omission is somehow OK.

For me, It strengthens my belief in Zimmerman's intuition and judgement were correct to suspect Martin, I can't help but wonder what might have happened if Martin had a weapon with him that night.

While the gun and drugs by themselves don't mean Martin was a thug, together and with other things we know about him, it paints a clear enough picture for me that I know I don't want him or his kind around me or my family.

It also demonstrates an actual conspiracy by prosecutors and their minions, which if not for someone brave enough to come forward, we would never have learned about. Someone please explain how suppressing this evidence furthers the cause for truth and fairness in this trial?

you do realize zimmermen got out of his truck with a loaded weapon, chased after martin, and shot him after getting into a struggle with him....all of which is illegal and was told by the police over the phone not to do? .....so that means you have the moral authority to go out and shoot any black person in a hoody walking in your neighborhood because he looks like a thug and therefore "suspicious"

you're right that all indications suggest zimmerman initiated the incident. it appears likely that he was getting the crap beat out of him and used the weapon in response. definitely a loose cannon. and as for pics of weed--gimme a break! not saying trayvon was an angel, but he actually wasn't doing anything wrong before being stalked with a gun. manslaughter of some degree, probably.

I'm reading some of these comments and I can't believe how much hatred and ignorance I'm seeing, people saying he should've been KILLED because he of how he was dressed, it's sad, this is the kind of stuff you'd expect to see in 1964 Mississippi, I thought we've moved on a little, I guess not.

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by Paschar0

 

Someone please explain how suppressing this evidence furthers the cause for truth and fairness in this trial?

Because Martin being a thug isn't the issue here. That isn't what is on trial. Much as we'd maybe like to, we can't just go around shooting thugs as we please....

Dammit!! Why not?


Funny...but every day people come in to apply for a job and they are dressed like thugs and punks and then do not understand why they are not considered for a position in OUTSIDE SALES...business to business no less.

People can be incredibly dense....

To me this seems like a case of the perfect storm between two people with chips on their shoulders.
Even as I do my best to look at this case objectively, I am unable to see a way where Zimmerman is not at least partially at fault and where manslaughter charges would not apply. His attorney dropping the SYG defense, for me, is just proof of this.

I feel like the defense is grasping at straws at this point in order to paint Zimmerman as the victim while hoping for a sympathetic jury.

They want the jury to see Zimmerman as the innocent neighborhood watch guy who was just doing his due diligence and was met by thuggish TM who gave him no choice but to fatally shoot him to save his own life.

The only problem is that this story is full of holes.

-If you look into TM's past, you must then look at Zimmerman's past.

-You can't claim to be the neighborhood watch if there is no official neighborhood watch. To add, if he was part of an official neighborhood watch program, then he would know that you NEVER confront a suspicious person. What may be suspicious to you may not be suspicious to someone else. Your job is to observe and report to the police. The fact that Zimmerman followed TM both on vehicle and on foot to the point of confrontation actually gives TM his own defense.

-Zimmerman's cuts and lacerations only attest to the fact that there was a confrontation. They are not proof of cause and effect. His lacerations are no more proof that TM caused the confrontation as is the bullet in TM's chest proof that Zimmerman caused the confrontation.

-The only evidence that we have is Zimmerman's biased testimony that he was assaulted first, which, even if true, has to be weighed against the other factors which call into question why and how the confrontation started.
This is where painting TM as a thug and Zimmerman as the innocent victim will come into play in winning the hearts of the jury.

All that being said, I just don't see how Zimmerman is going home from this one as it was, in part, his actions that led to the death of another.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Assaulting someone for following you is the very definition of a thug. Civilized people do not resolve disputes, absent life or death, that way.

But, apart from Zimmerman's questionable testimony and some very flimsy physical evidence that supposedly corroborates his account, there is no proof that Trayvon ever did such a thing. You've accepted Zimmerman's testimony without even hearing him defend his story under the kind of questioning it deserves.

The evidence is consistent with his story. This is the fact of the matter. Based on the "beyond a reasonable doubt" criteria of a criminal trial, one cannot call him guilty regardless the political ramifications of the situation.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Assaulting someone for following you is the very definition of a thug. Civilized people do not resolve disputes, absent life or death, that way.

But, apart from Zimmerman's questionable testimony and some very flimsy physical evidence that supposedly corroborates his account, there is no proof that Trayvon ever did such a thing. You've accepted Zimmerman's testimony without even hearing him defend his story under the kind of questioning it deserves.

The evidence is consistent with his story. This is the fact of the matter. Based on the "beyond a reasonable doubt" criteria of a criminal trial, one cannot call him guilty regardless the political ramifications of the situation.

you mean his story that he changed several times and has had inconsistencies since the very beginning? this case is not cut and dry. we do not know for a fact that zimmerman is innocent or guilty, but we do know that he has changed his story and flat out lied about the facts.

Originally posted by Allegorical

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Allegorical

Originally posted by Tribunal
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

I was wondering about that myself.

In 2005, Zimmerman was arrested and charged with "resisting officer with violence" and "battery of law enforcement officer." Both these felonies are considered third-degree. Due to his desperate attempts, the charges were reduced to "resisting officer without violence" and then the only remaining charge was also completely waived off when he entered an alcohol education program. In the same year (2005), Zimmerman's ex-fiance, Veronica Zuazo, filed a civil motion for a restraining order, alleging domestic violence. In retaliation, Zimmerman filed for a retraining order against Zuazo and both these claims were resolved with both restraining orders granted.

www.allvoices.com...

He doesn't have a record I guess, because he was never convicted of anything.

Trayvon was a seventeen year-old that was never arrested for anything EVER. George is well documented as your post above points out.

Trayvon was kicked out of school for his violent and disruptive tendencies, GZ was never convicted of anything.i

So? That means he's an uncivilized, idiotic thug that deserves to die? He was SUSPENDED from school for 3 days (not kicked out). Suspended from school, not sentenced to death. There is an extremely big difference there.

As for "wasn't convicted of a thing", his dad is a judge for pete's sake! Are you implying that both the police incident and the domestic violence incident were totally fictional and zimmerman was totally innocent? He was charged with multiple felonies and facing prison time twice before this case.

Just as you say TM's past should not be held against him because he was never convicted of a crime, then neither should GZ's to be consistent. The rest is assumption and speculation.

Originally posted by Allegorical

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Allegorical

Originally posted by Tribunal
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

I was wondering about that myself.

In 2005, Zimmerman was arrested and charged with "resisting officer with violence" and "battery of law enforcement officer." Both these felonies are considered third-degree. Due to his desperate attempts, the charges were reduced to "resisting officer without violence" and then the only remaining charge was also completely waived off when he entered an alcohol education program. In the same year (2005), Zimmerman's ex-fiance, Veronica Zuazo, filed a civil motion for a restraining order, alleging domestic violence. In retaliation, Zimmerman filed for a retraining order against Zuazo and both these claims were resolved with both restraining orders granted.

www.allvoices.com...

He doesn't have a record I guess, because he was never convicted of anything.

Trayvon was a seventeen year-old that was never arrested for anything EVER. George is well documented as your post above points out.

Trayvon was kicked out of school for his violent and disruptive tendencies, GZ was never convicted of anything.i

So? That means he's an uncivilized, idiotic thug that deserves to die? He was SUSPENDED from school for 3 days (not kicked out). Suspended from school, not sentenced to death. There is an extremely big difference there.

As for "wasn't convicted of a thing", his dad is a judge for pete's sake! Are you implying that both the police incident and the domestic violence incident were totally fictional and zimmerman was totally innocent? He was charged with multiple felonies and facing prison time twice before this case.

Just as you say TM's past should not be held against him because he was never convicted of a crime, then neither should GZ's to be consistent. The rest is assumption and speculation.

Originally posted by conspiracy nut

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Assaulting someone for following you is the very definition of a thug. Civilized people do not resolve disputes, absent life or death, that way.

But, apart from Zimmerman's questionable testimony and some very flimsy physical evidence that supposedly corroborates his account, there is no proof that Trayvon ever did such a thing. You've accepted Zimmerman's testimony without even hear
ing him defend his story under the kind of questioning it deserves.

The evidence is consistent with his story. This is the fact of the matter. Based on the "beyond a reasonable doubt" criteria of a criminal trial, one cannot call him guilty regardless the political ramifications of the situation.

you mean his story that he changed several times and has had inconsistencies since the very beginning? this case is not cut and dry. we do not know for a fact that zimmerman is innocent or guilty, but we do know that he has changed his story and flat out lied about the facts.

If like to see evidence of these alleged inconsistencies.

Regardless, what I have said us that his observed injuries are objectively consistent with his story.

Originally posted by xEphon
To me this seems like a case of the perfect storm between two people with chips on their shoulders.
Even as I do my best to look at this case objectively, I am unable to see a way where Zimmerman is not at least partially at fault and where manslaughter charges would not apply. His attorney dropping the SYG defense, for me, is just proof of this.

I feel like the defense is grasping at straws at this point in order to paint Zimmerman as the victim while hoping for a sympathetic jury.

They want the jury to see Zimmerman as the innocent neighborhood watch guy who was just doing his due diligence and was met by thuggish TM who gave him no choice but to fatally shoot him to save his own life.

The only problem is that this story is full of holes.

-If you look into TM's past, you must then look at Zimmerman's past.

-You can't claim to be the neighborhood watch if there is no official neighborhood watch. To add, if he was part of an official neighborhood watch program, then he would know that you NEVER confront a suspicious person. What may be suspicious to you may not be suspicious to someone else. Your job is to observe and report to the police. The fact that Zimmerman followed TM both on vehicle and on foot to the point of confrontation actually gives TM his own defense.

-Zimmerman's cuts and lacerations only attest to the fact that there was a confrontation. They are not proof of cause and effect. His lacerations are no more proof that TM caused the confrontation as is the bullet in TM's chest proof that Zimmerman caused the confrontation.

-The only evidence that we have is Zimmerman's biased testimony that he was assaulted first, which, even if true, has to be weighed against the other factors which call into question why and how the confrontation started.
This is where painting TM as a thug and Zimmerman as the innocent victim will come into play in winning the hearts of the jury.

All that being said, I just don't see how Zimmerman is going home from this one as it was, in part, his actions that led to the death of another.

edit on 31-5-2013 by xEphon because: (no reason given)

I have to say, this is the most rational statement regarding this case I have read. I have to bow to your logic and presentation of what we know and rethink my position.

Well stated, well done!