ZIMMERMAN VERDICT IS IN - NOT GUILTY
LKL wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
simon_says wrote:
It's in his interest to stop at the scene of accidents and make sure the press finds out about it. His attorney knows the score even if some here can't do the math. It's his reputation that needs help now. Someone should ask him how many accidents he's stopped at before this happened. I bet he'll break all records this year. Not hard to find them if you drive around looking.
You don't seem to believe a single negative fact about Zimmerman. And you won't allow that Martin had any right to self defense no matter what happened. My dog is less biased toward food.
jacoby wrote:
I know everything you're talking about and most it was blown wildly out of proportion by people with agendas, certainly nothing that can be construed as a 'history of violence'. There has been way more of misrepresentation of Zimmerman than there has been Martin, that's a fact and not an opinion.
You don't seem to believe a single negative fact about Zimmerman. And you won't allow that Martin had any right to self defense no matter what happened. My dog is less biased toward food.
Nonsense, when have I said that Martin had no right to self defense? I don't believe he attacked Martin and there is no evidence to suggest he did. If Zimmerman attacked Martin then he'd be 100% right to defend himself but what he did went beyond just defending himself regardless of what provoked the beating. If Martin was the one screaming for help then he probably wouldn't mounted Zimmerman and started bashing his head into the pavement. All the evidence is consistent with Zimmerman's story, could other things have happened? Maybe but there is no way of determining that and even if they did happen differently, it definitely did not happen the way the most ardent Martin supporters seem to think it did.
Zimmerman admits to following, first in a car and then on foot, Martin; he admits to confronting him, and to shooting him. If, at some point in there, Martin felt that he had to attack Zimmerman out of fear for his life, the ultimate outcome suggests that Martin was justified in that fear.
As for bashing his head on the ground, the police photos from the night of the incident do not suggest very severe 'bashing;' Zimmerman looks mildly roughed up. I've seen far more severe injuries on people who fell off their own porch steps. It is also completely possible to be screaming for help and struggling at the same time; that's what Zimmerman claims *he* was doing, after all; why is it less believeable that Martin was doing the same?
I wouldn't have put it past Zimmerman to have caused his own injuries, just to cover up his homicide.
Greb wrote:
Max000 wrote:
Dantac wrote:
err... just how do you think someone being accosted by a stranger (as Z was to T ) with a weapon drawn ends up in a fistfight where the gun holder? More importantly, how could it possibly end up in a situation where the gun holder is on the ground getting his face pummeled rather than GETTING the gun away from him being the primary struggle? Z wouldve had bruises in his weapon arm if that was the case.
Too easy. The first example in this video.
Fine. Go to some gang or drug area in your city, disarm some guy there and then come back here to tell the experience.
'Too easy'. Dear god. Hollywood, too much Hollywood...
I hate to use clips from movies as examples but this drill is a much more practical and safe alternative to the same scenario that Max0000's video portrays.
The only thing wrong in a real world scenario is the coupe de grace he gave T1 when he retrieves the briefcase at the end.
Other than that it was very well executed from any practical perspective. I've practiced this by myself and with others.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiqwF_Y9S5Q[/youtube]
_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson
Raptor wrote:
Greb wrote:
Max000 wrote:
Dantac wrote:
err... just how do you think someone being accosted by a stranger (as Z was to T ) with a weapon drawn ends up in a fistfight where the gun holder? More importantly, how could it possibly end up in a situation where the gun holder is on the ground getting his face pummeled rather than GETTING the gun away from him being the primary struggle? Z wouldve had bruises in his weapon arm if that was the case.
Too easy. The first example in this video.
Fine. Go to some gang or drug area in your city, disarm some guy there and then come back here to tell the experience.
'Too easy'. Dear god. Hollywood, too much Hollywood...
I hate to use clips from movies as examples but this drill is a much more practical and safe alternative to the same scenario that Max0000's video portrays.
The only thing wrong in a real world scenario is the coupe de grace he gave T1 when he retrieves the briefcase at the end.
Other than that it was very well executed from any practical perspective. I've practiced this by myself and with others.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiqwF_Y9S5Q[/youtube]
There are plenty of instruction videos that show in detail how to do it better then that movie scene. It's too bad that Martin hadn't seen some of them. If he had he would be alive today, and Zimmerman would be in the ground. Of course Martin being black would not have gotten acquitted. But at least he would be alive, and that racist piece of s**t Zimmerman would be dead.
Raptor wrote:
Greb wrote:
Max000 wrote:
Dantac wrote:
err... just how do you think someone being accosted by a stranger (as Z was to T ) with a weapon drawn ends up in a fistfight where the gun holder? More importantly, how could it possibly end up in a situation where the gun holder is on the ground getting his face pummeled rather than GETTING the gun away from him being the primary struggle? Z wouldve had bruises in his weapon arm if that was the case.
Too easy. The first example in this video.
Fine. Go to some gang or drug area in your city, disarm some guy there and then come back here to tell the experience.
'Too easy'. Dear god. Hollywood, too much Hollywood...
I hate to use clips from movies as examples but this drill is a much more practical and safe alternative to the same scenario that Max0000's video portrays.
The only thing wrong in a real world scenario is the coupe de grace he gave T1 when he retrieves the briefcase at the end.
Other than that it was very well executed from any practical perspective. I've practiced this by myself and with others.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiqwF_Y9S5Q[/youtube]
I'm always have seen a problem with all this techniques: they're based in a well defined scenario. From the very beginning is clear that we're dealing with a fight.
Street fights are often not-well defined scenarios. Violence scalates progressively, it's not clear if something is gonna lead to physical violence or not, and often during the 'threatening' phase people gets very close to each other physically. And martial arts don't deal that well with melee or floor fight, they need some distance between opponents to do their best.
Probably Z was trying to avoid the fight, so he left M to bump into him. Once in the floor, in melee and half knocked, martial arts are not that useful. Martin was knocking his head, and this case you can't think clearly. Everything is blurry. So, unless you're really good at martial arts, so they have become instinctive and you don't need to think, you're done. Your best option is trying to reach your gun and shot.
_________________
1 part of Asperger | 1 part of OCD | 2 parts of ADHD / APD / GT-LD / 2e
And finally, another part of secret spices :^)
Max000 wrote:
Quote:
There are plenty of instruction videos that show in detail how to do it better then that movie scene.
Your video or mine? Mine actually is at least tactically feasible.
Quote:
It's too bad that Martin hadn't seen some of them.
You're suggesting that Martin should have been armed now.
Hmmmmm........
Quote:
If he had he would be alive today, and Zimmerman would be in the ground.
Maybe, maybe not.
Quote:
Of course Martin being black would not have gotten acquitted.
Do you actually think if it had been Martin in Zimmerman's shoes in the same trial with all the same players that he would have been convicted on race?
We're talking about the homeland of Mickey Mouse, Pluto, and Donald Duck in the year 2013, not apartheid South Africa in the 80's.
Quote:
But at least he would be alive, and that racist piece of sh** Zimmerman would be dead.
Zimmerman is from a racially diverse family. How long are you and yours going to continue to bring race into this?
It really is getting very tedious.
_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson
Max000 wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
You saw Zimmerman grab Martin in the dark? Even if he did, the justifiable amount of force would be as much as was necessary to escape, not sitting on his chest bashing his head in.
No, I don't believe that Zimmerman did grab Martin. I believe that Zimmerman pointed his gun and Martin, and Martin fought for his life, as best he could for the last few seconds of his life.
except for T's GF testimony that she heard Z respond (same words his version of the story states too) to T's initial words and right after that the scuffle began.
This shows Z did not have the weapon unholstered nor did he draw it when T came up to him and confronted him.
Did Z draw it while he was replying? If so, would T have channeled his inner ninja and very quietly 'whooped ass' as he dropped the phone or headset (whatever he was using on his cell) and fought Z.
C'mon now. The response to a gun being pointed at you mid-sentence is not to punch someone without saying something. Furthermore, Z would have been very unlikely to approach or let himself be approached that close up if his intention was to pull a gun out.
and that video... its hilarious you bring that as evidence. My Judo instructor spent months drilling into us techniques similar to that and vs. knives and very few people got it right during surprise tests of the technique. You have to be an advanced belt... close at or near master level to really be able to pull this off consistently without something going wrong. It is highly unlikely T. pulled something like that vs. Z.
Max000 wrote:
Raptor wrote:
How long are you and yours going to continue to bring race into this?
It really is getting very tedious.
It really is getting very tedious.
As long as the polls continue to look like this, and this country remains the raciest s**thole that it is.

As long as the polls look like that we know we are still living in a free country the truth hurts now do something besides try to make criminals into victims and victims into criminals. Black people don't deserve any special treatment anymore than Asians whites arabs or latinos until people like you understand that there will always be racism there are no special people.
Ann2011 wrote:
What's he supposed to win? Are you suggesting that he showed good judgement in the Martin incident? I think he has shown himself to have poor judgment in that matter.
The car accident is different, but his desire to involve himself may get him into more trouble - especially if he feels empowered by the verdict.
The car accident is different, but his desire to involve himself may get him into more trouble - especially if he feels empowered by the verdict.
A little bit of good faith. Reacting to someone's good deed with hostility and suspicion is asinine, at best.
_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.
- Rick Sanchez
Ann2011 wrote:
The car accident is different, but his desire to involve himself may get him into more trouble - especially if he feels empowered by the verdict.
I hope that, if one day I have a car accident, anybody who passes by the road will be like Zimmerman, not like you.
_________________
1 part of Asperger | 1 part of OCD | 2 parts of ADHD / APD / GT-LD / 2e
And finally, another part of secret spices :^)
GGPViper wrote:
Actually, that was my entire *point*. If people are going to introduce frivolous "evidence", then they should do so symmetrically (not just against Martin, but against Zimmerman as well). I will gladly retreat from any such behaviour against Zimmerman once the Trayvon Martin haters on WP do the same.
To what end? So you are just as covered in sh*t as they are?
I also have to take issue with your characterization of people, you seem to be completely discounting the idea that people are digging into Martin's background in order to shed light on the situation rather than out of malice towards him. I also haven't seen you post anything but venom against Zimmerman, so apparently you're not subject to the standard you're demanding of other people; there's a word for that.
GGPViper wrote:
And at least I got the facts straight.
Yes, you went the Michael Moore route and simply posted misleading images and let people draw their own conclusions.
GGPViper wrote:
Releasing Martin's own words and photos constitutes a "racist attempt at character assassination? When the Martin Family attorneys were trying to do the exact same thing to Zimmerman, not to mention going on every talk show that would have them and painting him as a racist murderer? While he was on trial for his life? Do me a favor, don't ever lecture anyone about bias again, I might throw up a little bit and I hate doing that.
GGPViper wrote:
And his defense team even had to apologize publicly for misrepresenting evidence:
http://www.gzlegalcase.com/index.php/pr ... rtin-video.
http://www.gzlegalcase.com/index.php/pr ... rtin-video.
Ooh, they mis-captioned a video and then apologized for it, obviously off with their heads...
Really, I wouldn't even be bugging you about this if it wasn't for the personal double standard on display, that's a bit of a pet peeve of mine.
_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.
- Rick Sanchez
Jacoby wrote:
LKL wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
simon_says wrote:
It's in his interest to stop at the scene of accidents and make sure the press finds out about it. His attorney knows the score even if some here can't do the math. It's his reputation that needs help now. Someone should ask him how many accidents he's stopped at before this happened. I bet he'll break all records this year. Not hard to find them if you drive around looking.
You don't seem to believe a single negative fact about Zimmerman. And you won't allow that Martin had any right to self defense no matter what happened. My dog is less biased toward food.
jacoby wrote:
I know everything you're talking about and most it was blown wildly out of proportion by people with agendas, certainly nothing that can be construed as a 'history of violence'. There has been way more of misrepresentation of Zimmerman than there has been Martin, that's a fact and not an opinion.
You don't seem to believe a single negative fact about Zimmerman. And you won't allow that Martin had any right to self defense no matter what happened. My dog is less biased toward food.
Nonsense, when have I said that Martin had no right to self defense? I don't believe he attacked Martin and there is no evidence to suggest he did. If Zimmerman attacked Martin then he'd be 100% right to defend himself but what he did went beyond just defending himself regardless of what provoked the beating. If Martin was the one screaming for help then he probably wouldn't mounted Zimmerman and started bashing his head into the pavement. All the evidence is consistent with Zimmerman's story, could other things have happened? Maybe but there is no way of determining that and even if they did happen differently, it definitely did not happen the way the most ardent Martin supporters seem to think it did.
Zimmerman admits to following, first in a car and then on foot, Martin; he admits to confronting him, and to shooting him. If, at some point in there, Martin felt that he had to attack Zimmerman out of fear for his life, the ultimate outcome suggests that Martin was justified in that fear.
As for bashing his head on the ground, the police photos from the night of the incident do not suggest very severe 'bashing;' Zimmerman looks mildly roughed up. I've seen far more severe injuries on people who fell off their own porch steps. It is also completely possible to be screaming for help and struggling at the same time; that's what Zimmerman claims *he* was doing, after all; why is it less believeable that Martin was doing the same?
Unless Zimmerman brandished his gun at Martin, Martin had no reason to fear for his life. As mentioned, Martin had no injuries besides the fatal gun shot and his fists. I don't know how you'd go from someone brandishing a gun at you to you bashing their skull into the concrete to getting shot by the same person, that makes no sense.
We only have Zimmerman's word that he did not do so, and only Zimmerman's word that Martin reached for the gun; given that Zimmerman's account initially involved a B-movie script of 'You're going to die toninght,' and 'You got me,' from Martin, in direct contradiction of the sound on the neighbor's 911 calls, I don't trust Zimmerman's word a whole hell of a lot.
@ Max: the injuries on the police videos don't look fake to me, but neither do they look like he was in any significant peril.
Max000 wrote:
Instead we got this sham trial.
You are correct, it was a sham trial.
I saw a prosecution produce weak evidence and a judge bend over backwards to push a conviction forward. In spite of the blatant effort to help the prosecution win its case, the jury STILL came back with NOT GUILTY.
The judge committed reversible error more than once then tried to CYA during the jury instructions...which might have held up on an appeal of a conviction.
Face it, no matter what you choose to believe, the state failed to prove it's case. Game over. Get over it.
Dox47 wrote:
Ann2011 wrote:
What's he supposed to win? Are you suggesting that he showed good judgement in the Martin incident? I think he has shown himself to have poor judgment in that matter.
The car accident is different, but his desire to involve himself may get him into more trouble - especially if he feels empowered by the verdict.
A little bit of good faith. Reacting to someone's good deed with hostility and suspicion is asinine, at best.
The car accident is different, but his desire to involve himself may get him into more trouble - especially if he feels empowered by the verdict.
A little bit of good faith. Reacting to someone's good deed with hostility and suspicion is asinine, at best.
I have reason to regard Zimmerman with suspicion. You seem to be the one throwing the ad hominems now.
Greb wrote:
Ann2011 wrote:
The car accident is different, but his desire to involve himself may get him into more trouble - especially if he feels empowered by the verdict.
I hope that, if one day I have a car accident, anybody who passes by the road will be like Zimmerman, not like you.
Aww, I never said I wouldn't stop. If I could help I would. But I've never shot anyone I thought looked suspicious.
LKL wrote:
@ Max: the injuries on the police videos don't look fake to me, but neither do they look like he was in any significant peril.
Seriously? How about you go to the roughest part of your town tonight and when you get jumped do kindly resist and fight. Then come back and tell me you did not feel you were in any significant peril.
After all, when your face is getting bashed in and slammed on the pavement it is nothing but foreplay isn't it?
