The Zimmerman Trial

Wrong thread. Sorry.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by Tlove250

 

What does a force continuum have to do with anything? Civilians are not held to the same standards as LEO anyways, so bringing it up is kind of pointless. The expert on force continuum would have said it was justified in his opinion, if he was allowed to. He did a good job of saying it without saying it directly anyways.

edit on Thu, 11 Jul 2013 18:44:54 -0500 by TKDRL because: can't type tonight

The force continuum is common sense. Guess what? Whatever name you call it you are also held to the same rules of engagement. If someone slaps you in the face, shoot them and see what happens to you. They brought in an expert who did bring it up but glossed over the actual rule because of his bias. If you all cannot see that then intelligent conversation cannot be had here, and this thread should have been shutdown long ago. The motto is deny ignorance, not embrace blind bias, so, peace people.

reply to post by Tlove250


Officers are trained with many other weapons, they have a toolbelt full of them. Civillians, not so much..... Civilians are not required to try and hit someone on top of them with a flashlight, when they have a gun......

Biased witness? Why, because he was stating something that you did not want to hear? It was glossed over to show his expertise, if it was actually relevant, it would have been gone into in depth I am sure...

Originally posted by Tlove250

This has what to do with the force continuum? When he was allegedly getting beat, as in all those times his head struck the concrete and he only received two scratches, is obviously not the point. What did I say? Go back and read what I said a couple times. Maybe I have to spell it out in here. As the fight escalates so does the force, so obviously I am talking about early on. When he was punched in the face for following a kid in the dark he should have ran or struck back with his flashlight, restrained, then called the police. However, I understand, a year or more of mma classes only got him a, what was that? One percent rating? And he thought he could serve the community by observing and reporting? And he could not even do that right? Observe, report, follow, get beat up, shoot? This is your hero? Pathetic.

^^ this is the problem with the mindset of the majority of Z haterz/ Z guilty, of Something folks, not just on this site, but Many others as well. ^^

and , ironically similar to the closing arguments of the State prosecutor - assumption, conjecture and leading thoughts or premise with regards what Actually took place. - when you make it up as you go to 'prove' a point, you simply cannot negate the creation of 'resonable doubt' - did it really happen like that.

no way in Hades a jury should convict on ANY of the charges ... initially or, Now, after they've entered others just prior to it going to deliberation.

It's been a joke from the start, and they [the state of Florida, .Gov, etc. should have simply let it be. AS those officers and LAW ENFORCEMENT did on the night of it happening. They saw NO reason to pursue charges .... and THAT IS NOT SOMETHING YOU TYPICALLY SEE in these type situations.

THEY WANT TO PRESS CHARGES - someone's gotta pay [hello!?] - YET THEY DIDN'T.

? WHY ?

would seem quite obvious.

They had NO case to make, no charges to press.

I'd much rather trust and believe in the minds of those who were actually present and tasked with attending to/handling the situation, than what we've been subject to since it was tossed into the state prosecuter's hands - find a man/find a charge/press it, approach. the obvios outside influence being .. WELL... obvious.

Why not.? Hell they'd already garnered the media's 'attention' via playing the race card and what not.

this entire situation has been a farce from beginning to end. No excuses. Simple as that.

no matter the outcome.

all sides lost lives.

for what?

career gains? futhering personal/political agendas, etc.

Hell ... you could make the same argument as the prosecution has here .... all speculatively and what not ... just as the prosecution has done throughout.

Here on ATS... it's typically.

Pics or it didn't happen.
Links. Proof.

as should be the same in a court of law.

the prosecution, on the other hand, would have you believe that the 'picture' they've p'painted' via supposition and nearly-baseless conjecture to be 'what really happened that night'. (?)

What the Hail happened to presenting Actual evidence of wrongdoing to a Jury. (?)

Thought the Casey Anthony case was a farce [in the opposite direction], but this one really takes the cake. - PATHETIC

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by seabag

 

See this?

www.washingtontimes.com...

That entire trial is an insult to MLK.

Oh man!!!

That was absolutely shameless. I feel embarrassed just reading that. This putz is really working every angle imaginable. I'm so sick of the race baiting in this country. It's almost like crying wolf at this point for me; it doesn't have the same effect it used to. It's actually becoming offensive and an insult to our intelligence at this point.

Originally posted by caladonea
The prosecution is pushing hard for a 3rd or 2nd degree murder charge.

This is what Florida law says: www.richardhornsby.com...

What say you ATS...do you think he is going to do some time in prison?

Also...what do you think of Mr. Zimmerman as a person?

I am sure with murder 2 he will be found not guilty but there is a possibility manslaughter will be a hung jury in which case they can retry him on manslaughter but by that time both sides will have polished this turd of a case and he will go free.

That is if the jury doesn't find him not guilty for both this time but there is no way he will be convicted.

Just a few thoughts. Since this is a conspiracy site, here is some fodder for conspiracy.

Prosecutor - Do you really think he wanted a case where there was no way to establish any clear cut timeline facts? He was stuck with this case and probably told to do the best he can. The best he can do is throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. He is probably very frustrated because he probably really did not want to be the one to try this case.

The Judge. - Some are saying she is biased against the defense. Wouldn't you be if you were stuck with a trial with little hard facts where it to be televised in the national spotlight. No matter which why she turns she is going to be the goat to someone. In Missouri some judge have to be reelected by the people to keep their jobs. Only a small number of people take the time to vote yea or nay for the judges. A small group of people with a grudge against a judge can cost the judge their job. This judge might be in a similar situation and blame the defense for putting her in such a situation.

White House / DOJCRS - There has been some reports that the WH and DOJ pushed for this trial and helped organize the rallies to get GZ arrested and tried. Wouldn't that be the best way to avoid social unrest? If the DOJCRS were in charge of the rallies they could direct them to be as peaceful as possible and also determine those people who would advocate violence and looting. The job of the government is to protect citizens from threats both foreign and DOMESTIC. Best way to avoid rioting is to infiltrate the organizations most like to cause the civil unrest and identify the those prepared to unleash violence. Also, after 8 hrs of screaming, yelling, shouting in protest; how much energy would you have to loot?

The Media: Remember the media and the government/politicians are the two groups that have the right to be two faced about a topic. Don't be surprised by their news special report show having an episode title like: "Anatomy of a Tragedy: The Trayvon Martin Story". These episode can easily use all that information that was dug up via FOIA and paint Trayvon as a tragic figure that was done in by his societal upbringing. Remember what ever makes good copy goes on the air.

Al Sharpton: Al is no dummy he knows the best time to jump in the spotlight is at the beginning. Most of the donations are made in the first two weeks. Time to wait for the next obscure criminal situation to exploit.

Black Panthers - If they are promoting rioting they should remember that the the NSA has the power to track email and other electronic messaging media. You can get arrested for inciting a riot. The government NEVER wants a riot because then someone might decide to direct one at them. Bad choice to do. You could of course conduct a protest and shut down a highway for awhile as long as you give enough advance notice for authorities to reroute traffic.

What do you think?

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
although i feel zimmerman should face some accountability for his actions, according to the laws and the weak evidence provided by the state, i have a feeling the jury will come up with a not guilty verdict with a very slim chance of a manslaughter conviction. honestly i think the prosecution did a good job. i guess it all depends on if the jury believes it was george screaming and if his injuries show that zimmerman had reasonable reason to believe his life was in imminent danger, both of which i do not believe. in my opinion it was trayvon screaming for his life when he realized zimmerman had a gun. 2nd i find it hard to believe that zimmerman was able to get his gun out from being holstered while trayvon was "beating him to death" perhaps thats why zimmerman was getting hit because he didn't bother fighting back just going for his gun. i realize that is speculation but to me it makes much more sense, i don't believe zimmerman had to scream for his life he knew he had the gun and could end it within seconds if he could pull out his gun. 3rd i believe those injuries were insignificant to the point that zimmerman refused medical treatment, if his injuries were as life threatening he would have certainly needed immediate medical attention. these are just my opinions and i am entitled to them, they carry no weight and may not even be able to be used in making a decision on the case because admittedly it is mostly speculation. i would not argue with a not guilty or manslaughter conviction, 2nd degree murder could not be proven IMO. on the other hand i would hate to see the backlashes from the pro zimmerman "legal eagles" on here if zimmerman is convicted.

edit on 11-7-2013 by conspiracy nut because: (no reason given)

I, for one, and glad trials are supposed to be based on facts, not feelings. Zimmerman doesn't have to prove anything. The prosecution didn't prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt. Injuries aren't required for self defense, just the fear of great bodily harm (with a broken nose, how can you doubt that?). If Trayvon didn't want a fight, why didn't he go "home", like he allegedly was doing?

This is so clearly a case of self-defense that I am amazed at the number of folks here, on TV, in the courtroom, in the WhiteHouse, trying to stir it up so that violence is expected when a not-guilty verdict is returned.

My conclusion is that this has a high likelihood of becoming the trigger for the intended Martial Law, gun confiscation, and Police State long planned by TPTB.

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
although i feel zimmerman should face some accountability for his actions, according to the laws and the weak evidence provided by the state, i have a feeling the jury will come up with a not guilty verdict with a very slim chance of a manslaughter conviction. honestly i think the prosecution did a good job. i guess it all depends on if the jury believes it was george screaming and if his injuries show that zimmerman had reasonable reason to believe his life was in imminent danger, both of which i do not believe. in my opinion it was trayvon screaming for his life when he realized zimmerman had a gun.

If you listen to the recordings of Zimmerman talking, and the screams, it's clear this is the same person. Plus, a witness confirms that it was Zimmerman screaming for help. There is NO question about that. He was seen pinned down, being beaten, and screaming for help. To believe anything else is to ignore the evidence.

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
2nd i find it hard to believe that zimmerman was able to get his gun out from being holstered while trayvon was "beating him to death" perhaps thats why zimmerman was getting hit because he didn't bother fighting back just going for his gun. i realize that is speculation but to me it makes much more sense, i don't believe zimmerman had to scream for his life he knew he had the gun and could end it within seconds if he could pull out his gun.

Well, your belief is incorrect, because he was being beaten (witnessed), and he did get the gun. He called for help because he did not WANT to shoot someone. That wasn't his first response. That is proof he isn't a violent person, right there.

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
3rd i believe those injuries were insignificant to the point that zimmerman refused medical treatment, if his injuries were as life threatening he would have certainly needed immediate medical attention. these are just my opinions and i am entitled to them, they carry no weight and may not even be able to be used in making a decision on the case because admittedly it is mostly speculation. i would not argue with a not guilty or manslaughter conviction, 2nd degree murder could not be proven IMO. on the other hand i would hate to see the backlashes from the pro zimmerman "legal eagles" on here if zimmerman is convicted.

edit on 11-7-2013 by conspiracy nut because: (no reason given)

You do not have to sustain life-threatening injuries in order to legally use deadly force to defend yourself. You simply have to believe that you COULD sustain such injuries, or death. Read the law. There is no case for either murder or manslaughter. Even State witnesses supported the defense case, down to little details. The woman at the corner stated plainly that you CANNOT see her house number from many places, because of the distance, the darkness that night, and the fact that there are a truck AND a bush blocking much of the view. She also stated there are no street signs anywhere near the front of her house. In other words, Zimmerman was honest about not being able to locate an address. Even a photo taken by the state shows the numbers are obscured, and not easily seen from the sidewalk he would have used. Martin was witnessed on top in the fight, and was never hit. Every single detail in this case calls for an acquittal regarding all charges.

Self defense is a very real, and very important right. It should not be attacked based on political maneuvering or because of the racial identity of the person killed. No, not the victim. The victim here is George Zimmerman. He was the only victim.

reply to post by MuzzleBreak


there wont be any riots. if there are any, they'll be small imo. I'm also pretty sure they have riot police on standby after the verdict is read.

If what the prosecutor said was to be believed, Zimmerman was a crazed and angry wanna be cop with visions of glory and grandeur, who, hunted down a young black man for the sole purpose of killing him.

The problem with such a statement is that the state never put forth a doctors of psychology that could state that Zimmerman was angry, crazed, had police envy, or was a racist bigot.

The next problem with intent is that why would anyone want to start a fight in the open in the middle of a neighborhood with many people possibly looking on, where he even lived nearby, so he could take out his hate filled rage on a young black man.


This leaves the prosecution at a severe disadvantage because without intent and without a proven state of mind the state is lacking.

The central fact of this case is that Zimmerman fired a single shot killing a man who was causing serious and potentially deadly bodily harm him him, who only did so after calling out for help.

Simple case, Not guilty.

Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
reply to post by Tlove250

 

you got a picture of the "long flashlight" as you put it as when i hear that i picture a maglight not what i thought i saw in the evidence photos (small flashlight but made of metal) and so if im geting this right the state is mad he didnt use his flashlight to bash the kid in the face instead of shooting him?
*snip*

They focus on "Maglite" because most peopel think of only the big ones. Fact is, they make smaller ones. I have one, about six inches long, that takes two AA batteries. It's NOT a weapon. I would bet that's what Zimmerman had, or something close (they also make a AAA model), though I haven't seen pics. I can also guarantee that, if I was in his situation, and had a gun and my mini-Mag, I would go for the gun, against someone beating me like that. There isn't a legal requirement to use the least force possible for self defense, not in Florida. Nor, for that matter, should there be!

The state is using anything and everything to prejudice people against the defendant, because they have no real evidence of a crime. Your phrasing is pretty good on that issue!

Wish I had time to read this thread before replying but, wow, this is massive.

I think this was intentially blown out of proportion as a race thing to gain ratings BUT i don't see any conclusion other than Zimmerman being guilty of Manslaughter. 2cnd degree Murder was reaching.

The facts alone i believe show that Zimmerman alone escalated and caused the situation when only he was legally an adult and could be held completely responsible for his actions.

He tried and convicted Travon just by seeing him walking down the street, proven by his quote that was recorded on the 911 call. Although I'm not positive he actually knew Travon was black and I don't think that was a driving factor. It was likely how he dressed and carried himself, which is NOT justification for any violence.

He followed Travon, a legal child, likely scaring the crap out of Travon. Think of Travon's history, someone following him in a vehicle at a slow speed and watching him. He grew up knowing violent people, his likely conclusion was that his life was in danger. That gave Travon the right to fight, and kill, Zimmerman in self defense if it came to that.

I don't believe Zimmerman intentionally wanted to kill anyone and he may have believed he was doing the right thing. However we can never allow for our children to become expendable by saying if someone gets scared enough they can legally kill them. He had no injuries that were even close to life threatening and no legitimate argument because of that.

Travon on the other hand is supposed to be stupid, so much so that laws apply differently until it is considered that he can be fully responsible for his own actions. As a legal child I find it amazing that so many want to defend Zimmerman, it seems because of Travon's supposed thug background. Then somehow Zimmerman's violent background is completely acceptable in their eyes.

I just hope whatever the result is that no serious violence is sparked and I hope it makes it clear that we value our children. 2cnd degree murder is probably really reaching, there must be some conviction though otherwise we are saying our children just don't have much value. In the least we are saying that people can determine our children's value with one look which is unacceptable.

reply to post by inquisitive1977

Lol I am surprised the prosecutor didn't throw that one as well. We have to convict him! Do it for your children! And puppies too!

Originally posted by MuzzleBreak
This is so clearly a case of self-defense that I am amazed at the number of folks here, on TV, in the courtroom, in the WhiteHouse, trying to stir it up so that violence is expected when a not-guilty verdict is returned.

My conclusion is that this has a high likelihood of becoming the trigger for the intended Martial Law, gun confiscation, and Police State long planned by TPTB.

I thought I was the only one

reply to post by TKDRL


So no legitimate arguments there, i present facts and you basically whine.

Travon did nothing then, there was absolutely no reason to follow him and escalate the situation, Travon WAS a child regardless of what you want to believe. The laws are different as they apply to Travon, he can not be held responsible for his actions completely. Zimmerman should have known better and de-escalated or not even created the situation to start with. Zimmerman had no serious injuries and basically got as much as a bandaid and somehow claims his life was threatened by a CHILD.

Sorry but there is no legitimate defense, the prosecuter may have been completely inept but there is no way Zimmerman should get anything but manslaughter.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
although i feel zimmerman should face some accountability for his actions, according to the laws and the weak evidence provided by the state, i have a feeling the jury will come up with a not guilty verdict with a very slim chance of a manslaughter conviction. honestly i think the prosecution did a good job. i guess it all depends on if the jury believes it was george screaming and if his injuries show that zimmerman had reasonable reason to believe his life was in imminent danger, both of which i do not believe. in my opinion it was trayvon screaming for his life when he realized zimmerman had a gun.

If you listen to the recordings of Zimmerman talking, and the screams, it's clear this is the same person. Plus, a witness confirms that it was Zimmerman screaming for help. There is NO question about that. He was seen pinned down, being beaten, and screaming for help. To believe anything else is to ignore the evidence.

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
2nd i find it hard to believe that zimmerman was able to get his gun out from being holstered while trayvon was "beating him to death" perhaps thats why zimmerman was getting hit because he didn't bother fighting back just going for his gun. i realize that is speculation but to me it makes much more sense, i don't believe zimmerman had to scream for his life he knew he had the gun and could end it within seconds if he could pull out his gun.

Well, your belief is incorrect, because he was being beaten (witnessed), and he did get the gun. He called for help because he did not WANT to shoot someone. That wasn't his first response. That is proof he isn't a violent person, right there.

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
3rd i believe those injuries were insignificant to the point that zimmerman refused medical treatment, if his injuries were as life threatening he would have certainly needed immediate medical attention. these are just my opinions and i am entitled to them, they carry no weight and may not even be able to be used in making a decision on the case because admittedly it is mostly speculation. i would not argue with a not guilty or manslaughter conviction, 2nd degree murder could not be proven IMO. on the other hand i would hate to see the backlashes from the pro zimmerman "legal eagles" on here if zimmerman is convicted.

edit on 11-7-2013 by conspiracy nut because: (no reason given)

You do not have to sustain life-threatening injuries in order to legally use deadly force to defend yourself. You simply have to believe that you COULD sustain such injuries, or death. Read the law. There is no case for either murder or manslaughter. Even State witnesses supported the defense case, down to little details. The woman at the corner stated plainly that you CANNOT see her house number from many places, because of the distance, the darkness that night, and the fact that there are a truck AND a bush blocking much of the view. She also stated there are no street signs anywhere near the front of her house. In other words, Zimmerman was honest about not being able to locate an address. Even a photo taken by the state shows the numbers are obscured, and not easily seen from the sidewalk he would have used. Martin was witnessed on top in the fight, and was never hit. Every single detail in this case calls for an acquittal regarding all charges.

Self defense is a very real, and very important right. It should not be attacked based on political maneuvering or because of the racial identity of the person killed. No, not the victim. The victim here is George Zimmerman. He was the only victim.

Yeah, those screams really do sound like Zimmerman's voice. The dead giveaway imo is that really loud shrieking noise that rises above all the other yells.

reply to post by inquisitive1977


You reach and use far too much emotion. Keep saying "child, child, child" it won't make a difference.

I grew up around violent people (Detroit was the murder capitol of the world at the time). When I was 13 there were 214 murders in my city and 170 of them were within ten blocks of my house. I was a violent youth. I watched with pride as grown men crossed the street rather than walk by me. I was a beast at 16 (5'8", 185 lbs, 12% body fat). I joined the army at 17 and I was no child I assure you. I had already witnessed shootings, stabbings, beatings, and various other violent crimes. I had also fathered a child of my own.

Trayvon took it upon himself to attack a man in a dark area. He was not scared as you want to make it seem. If anything he felt he was being "fronted" (for lack of a better term). He felt as though his manhood was being questioned and he reacted. To be honest I would have done the same thing at his age and I am white, so race has nothing to do with it. He attacked Zimmerman for that reason and he was killed. He rolled the dice and lost. It's a violent world and I hate to say it but it might be an even more violent weekend.

++I would like to add that I have matured a great deal since my childhood. The military instilled in me a sense of respect for my fellow man and dignity in myself. I shake my head when I think of my younger self and I often wonder how and why I survived my upbringing.++

reply to post by inquisitive1977


Wow I wish you had time to read the thread too because your thoughts are baseless, irrelevant, and debunked about 200 pages ago. Maybe if people would read before chiming in this thread might actually get somewhere instead of saying the same thing over again 500 times