« First « Previous Comments 115 - 154 of 201 Next » Last » Search these comments
Interesting. If that was the case then I imagine TM had a lot of regret while holding down GZ in the last moments of his life. Regret for taking the offensive....regret for not just going to his father's girlfriends home in the 4 minutes he had available to cover 50 yards...regret for breaking GZ's nose....regret for pounding GZ's head into the cement...regret that he wished he actually "had limits"....And all the while knowing the second he let GZ up he was gonna be shot. That's a nasty image to conjure up.
MAybe because he knew or thought that if he did, Zimmerman was going to shoot him. That is if it's even true.
Not at all.
I am suggesting, by the same token, that we should not assume GZ was guilty.
Are you suggesting that we should assume TM's guilt?
Exactly And if you do not defend yourself and you wind up dead, the crowd will have it's proof, but your life is required as evidence.
And thus was born the concept of "self-defense".
but one thing for sure is that we can't say "with out reasonable doubt" that TM was an aggressor that was trying to -- or even would have -- killed Zim intentionally or otherwise.
It's not enough to convict TM or GZ of anything. But it is the only hard evidence available for the actual fight, along with the eyewitnesses conflicting reports. So if one were to attempt to draw a conclusion on the hard facts they would have to be leaning towards exonerating GZ.
Apparently enough -- or rather a lack there of -- evidence to convict. I think that if TM had killed GZ with a punch, and had the same legal defense, there would not have been enough evidence to convict TM either.
I classify the gunshot wound as neither offensive or defensive. It's the fatal wound that ended the confrontation.
So...if a punch from Trayvon had ended the confrontation by killing Zimmerman then that would not have been offensive?
I guess it's more fun to play fantasy than actually address facts, right?
Which you prove repeatedly. You still haven't addressed how the fight started. Why did Martin feel so threatened, that he fought like that. Could it be he feared for his life, and new that Zimmerman had a gun.
This is fantasy speculation ? I think not.
The idea that Martin just attacked Zimmerman for no reason ? Now that's wild fantasy speculation.
What we can say for certain is, Trayvon had plenty of opportunity to escape from Zimmerman (as much as you can escape from someone you are beating into a pulp into the ground)
How do you figure ? It was probably when he tried to escape that he was shot.
Here's a great comment from reddit.
Dear George Zimmerman, For the rest of your life you are now going to feel what its like to be a black man in America. You will feel people stare at you. Judging you for what you think are unfair reasons. You will lose out on getting jobs for something you feel is outside your control. You will believe yourself to be an upstanding citizen and wonder why people choose to not see that.
People will cross the street when they see you coming. They will call you hurtful names. It will drive you so insane some days that you’ll want to scream at the top of your lungs. But you will have to wake up the next day, put on a firm look and push through life.
I bet you never thought that by shooting a black male you’d end up inheriting all of his struggles.
Enjoy your “freedomâ€. Sincerely, A black male who could’ve been Trayvon Martin Author: Alex Fraser
http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1i92i8/its_official_george_zimmerman_not_guilty/
A lot of good comments there from intelligent people
Apparently enough -- or rather a lack there of -- evidence to convict. I think that if TM had killed GZ with a punch, and had the same legal defense, there would not have been enough evidence to convict TM either.
Agreed.
I classify the gunshot wound as neither offensive or defensive. It's the fatal wound that ended the confrontation.
So...if a punch from Trayvon had ended the confrontation by killing Zimmerman then that would not have been offensive?
The offensive and defensive wounds I was referring to are the ones inflicted by the hands of the opponents. I look at the gunshot as neither defensive or offensive, but the fight ending life saving life killing final wound.
Another
I can't imagine trying to go back to a normal life when half the nation thinks you're a murderer and the other half thinks you're just a killer (in self defense, of course).
What are the odds that GZ is "self defensed" (murdered), develops a debilitating anxiety disorder or commits suicide within the next few years? Seriously, think what his life will be like. If he goes in a public restroom, he'll be deathly afraid someone will "self defense" him while he's standing in front of a urinal:
"He seemed suspicious and was reaching for something. I know his history and felt I was in imminent danger..."
I would argue, "it" is most certainly over for GZ. His tortured existence is justice.
Why did Martin feel so threatened, that he fought like that. Could it be he feared for his life, and new that Zimmerman had a gun.
No. The Coroner's report indicates TM was high on drugs. Drugs often produce paranoia.
This is fantasy speculation ? I think not.
The idea that Martin just attacked Zimmerman for no reason ? Now that's wild fantasy speculation.
Maybe not "fantasy", but certainly speculation. Right now all we have is speculation trying to fill in the gaps of what happened that night. A jury made it clear that we just don't have the evidence to know for sure what happened.
Either pro-Zim or anti-Zim there is not a lot of speculation here that is not in some way consistent with the evidence. Just different imaginings of what happened during the gaps.
What we can say for certain is, Trayvon had plenty of opportunity to escape from Zimmerman (as much as you can escape from someone you are beating into a pulp into the ground)
How do you figure ? It was probably when he tried to escape that he was shot.
Yep, the scenario where TM tries to break away from Zim then gets shot is one of the many "likely" scenarios.
The offensive and defensive wounds I was referring to are the ones inflicted by the hands of the opponents. I look at the gunshot as neither defensive or offensive, but the fight ending life saving life killing final wound.
I guess I don't get your reasoning, but OK.
Either pro-Zim or anti-Zim there is not a lot of speculation here that is not in some way consistent with the evidence. Just different imaginings of what happened during the gaps.
Keep dreaming.
Yep, the scenario where TM tries to break away from Zim then gets shot is one of the many "likely" scenarios.
That would have the entry and exit wounds on the wrong sides of the body.
Yep, the scenario where TM tries to break away from Zim then gets shot is one of the many "likely" scenarios.
That would have the entry and exit wounds on the wrong sides of the body.
I guess you missed the whole trial. Sure, why pay attention to the evidence when you have already made up your mind.
Makes sense.
Up until the point where GZ thought his life was in danger, all we can tell is that they fought with their hands. Those are the wounds I consider "offensive and defensive" leading up to the gunshot, which ended it all.
So in trying to determine who initiated the fight, I classified each wound on each person, omitting the gunshot wound as it is irrelevant to determining who threw the first physical punch. To me whoever threw the first punch is the guilty party. We will never know for sure, but the wounds are hard indicators.
So when I look at the punch wounds, GZ had a beatdown given to him by TM, who was clean on punch wounds, but had knuckle wounds from beating downn on GZ.
The gunshot wound? One could call it an 'offensive' wound, but it does not indicate to me who started the fight. That's why i did not classify it as such.
The offensive and defensive wounds I was referring to are the ones inflicted by the hands of the opponents. I look at the gunshot as neither defensive or offensive, but the fight ending life saving life killing final wound.
I guess I don't get your reasoning, but OK.
Why are you racist Marcus?
A better handle would be commonsensedodgerjohn
It's a legit question. You see the world through glasses the rest of us don't, as evidenced by your statements and opinions.
You are racist. Why?
Yep, the scenario where TM tries to break away from Zim then gets shot is one of the many "likely" scenarios.
I guess you missed the whole trial. Sure, why pay attention to the evidence when you have already made up your mind.
Which is exactly what your doing.
Oh, really? My apologies!
Please point to the comment I made where I ignored the testimony from Zimmerman's expert witness saying that Trayvon may have been pulling away from Zimmerman when he was shot -- as was done by Reality. Something that would be totally consent with a scenario where TM is breaking off contact with Zim, but then gets shot. You did know that right? Or did you miss the trial as well?
It's amusing to listen to these sanctimonious, brainwashed racists spout off on this board. The revelation from the jurors really shines a light on these low bandwidth boobs with keyboards.
"That juror said she didn't think the shooting was racially motivated and that Zimmerman would have reacted the same way to someone of any race."
"I think he has every right to carry a gun," she said. "I think it's everyone's right to carry a gun" as long as they use it responsibly.
The juror said that she thinks it was Trayvon threw the first punch in the subsequent physical altercation that night and that she believed Zimmerman's account of what happened that night.
"I think George was pretty consistent and told the truth basically," she said."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/15/anderson-cooper-zimmerman-juror/2519569/
Why don't you go turn on CNN right now and listen to one of the jurors in her own voice give her reasons for the verdict.
This is the juror that already signed a book deal right?
This is the juror that already signed a book deal right?
You don't have to listen because we all know your mind is already made up, and you know more than all the evidence the jurors saw.
Funny you of all people should be saying that. I asked you a question-that is all.
Funny you of all people should be saying that. I asked you a question-that is all.
What does a book deal have at all to do with it... talk about twisted logic...
She has a book deal , which she signed for money within a day or two of the verdict. Now she has to promote it and maybe if it does well enogh , it will become a Hollywood blockbuster or at least a Lifetime movie. Why would anyone believe someone who is trying to profit out of it.
The other jurors I would be interested to hear-but not the one with a book deal-because for her it is now pure marketing and sales-she is now a salesperson/author.
Zimmerman's expert witness saying that Trayvon may have been pulling away from Zimmerman when he was shot -- as was done by Reality.
This is utter BS. Please stop misquoting me.
That would have the entry and exit wounds on the wrong sides of the body.
I guess you missed the whole trial. Sure, why pay attention to the evidence when you have already made up your mind.
Makes sense.
No it does not. The entry and exit wounds clearly show that TM was facing GZ when the shot was fired. So TM was not at all running away from GZ.
Yeah, ballistics is not a new field, it clearly showed that Trayvon was hit from the FRONT, not the back, and the evidence suggest Trayvon was on top of GZ when he caught that round to the chest. This isn't really disputable.
Of course you can argue that maybe Trayvon was trying to escape at the exact second the bullet was fired, but that ignores the fact that Trayvon had a lot of time to escape, even when told by a neighbor he was going to call the cops if he did not cut it out, yet Trayvon continued to punch out Zimmerman.
So TM was not at all running away from GZ
So you are saying that a person doesn't pull away (backwards) before running that they somehow are instantaneously turned around the very instant that they decide to flee ?
The entry and exit wounds clearly show that TM was facing GZ when the shot was fired. So TM was not at all running away from GZ.
Zimmerman's expert disagrees with you, one can be facing someone and yet backing away.
Emphasis mine.
DE LA RIONDA: But it's also consistent with Trayvon Martin pulling back in terms of providing the same angle.
DI MAIO: I told you that, too, yes, sir.
Here is the transcript:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1307/09/cnr.11.html
Also, Zimmerman also had plenty of chances to "getaway" from Trayvon.
That was part of Zimmerman's story actually, that he was walking back to his car...
Highly unlikely that Trayvon was attempting to escape at the exact moment the bullet was fired. Maybe he saw the gun for a split second then stopped his assault because he knew his ass was grass, but isn't that a bit too late?
Zimmerman's expert witness saying that Trayvon may have been pulling away from Zimmerman when he was shot -- as was done by Reality.
This is utter BS. Please stop misquoting me.
My apologies.
Were you actually agreeing with me that Trayvon could have been pulling away when he was shot? Because when you said:
Reality says
Yep, the scenario where TM tries to break away from Zim then gets shot is one of the many "likely" scenarios.
That would have the entry and exit wounds on the wrong sides of the body.
That sounded an awful lot to me like you were disagreeing with Zimmerman's expert gunshot witness.
If I was misquoting you please feel free to clarify.
Also, Zimmerman also had plenty of chances to "getaway" from Trayvon.
That was part of Zimmerman's story actually, that he was walking back to his car...
Yeah, I know. Zimmerman is a proven liar, and I only believe his story when it can be corroborated with additional evidence.
Do you really think that Zimmerman was going to follow Trayvon down the path to the common back yards, and then turn his back one of those assholes who always get away?
What motivation would Zim have to turn his back? What motivation would TM have to attack unprovoked? It makes no sense. I do understand that sometimes people act in ways that don't make sense, so yeah, maybe it did happen that way. I just don't think it was likely.
Highly unlikely that Trayvon was attempting to escape at the exact moment the bullet was fired.
Only if he did not see the gun. I think that it is highly likely for someone to back away when faced with a gun. Often times brandishing a gun is just effective as using one. This is one of the difficulties with trying to measure how effective guns are for self-defense.
Maybe he saw the gun for a split second then stopped his assault because he knew his ass was grass, but isn't that a bit too late?
It would not have to be too late. However, at that point a shooter might not realize that someone is pulling away.
I would start screaming if I was losing a struggle for a gun.
In fact, I have never seen a man scream during a fight.
I am certain now that Martin was the one screaming.
I would start screaming if I was losing a struggle for a gun.
Other than Zim's fanciful tail, there is no evidence that there was any struggle over the gun.
I would start screaming if I was losing a struggle for a gun.
Other than Zim's fanciful tail, there is no evidence that there was any struggle over the gun.
Men don't scream when they are fighting. I have seen too many fights.
Martin must have been scared of the gun.
What motivation would Zim have to turn his back?
Maybe he found where Trayvon was going to, and had an address to give to police like he claimed he was doing.
I'm definitely not going to assume he was hunting black people, he had plenty of opportunities to do that before Trayvon.
It would not have to be too late. However, at that point a shooter might not realize that someone is pulling away.
Uh, it's too late. You can't beat someone up, and then expect them to have split second decision making ability to not pull the trigger when the gun comes out.
Uh, it's too late. You can't beat someone up, and then expect them to have
split second decision making ability to not pull the trigger when the gun comes
out.
Wow.
You're free the test the theory. 9 times out of 10 you end up in a body bag like Trayvon.
Maybe he found where Trayvon was going to, and had an address to give to police like he claimed he was doing.
If this was the case it would have been in his statement.
The only reason I see for him turning his back is if he spoke with TM and felt comfortable enough to let him go on his way.
I'm definitely not going to assume he was hunting black people, he had plenty of opportunities to do that before Trayvon.
Highly unlikely he was hunting black people. Also, highly unlikely TM was hunting white people.
« First « Previous Comments 115 - 154 of 201 Next » Last » Search these comments
I felt sad when I saw the verdict in the George Zimmerman case. I shall speak now as one who attended law school but did not graduate. In almost any legal jurisdiction in the world, if someone shoots an unarmed person, even if that person is a policeman or soldier, the person doing the shooting is in serious trouble. A conviction for manslaughter often follows and one is sent away to jail for some time. I honestly felt that Zimmerman was guilty of terrible bad judgment and such a verdict was warranted.
I feel that the way Florida wrote its definition of self defense tied the hands of the jury and left them with no option but to find Zimmerman not guilty.
This is a sad case where everyone including the taxpayers of the state of Florida lost "big time."
My father had some words of wisdom that apply here as follows: "Son a gun will get you into more trouble than it will ever get you out of."