Did you all know about this evidence on Martin's phone the judge wouldn't allow?

[opendebate]

There was obviously much more to this situation than an innocent bystander being harassed by a mugger.

I agree. People seem so driven to make the situation about a good guy vs a bad guy, to simplify it and make it black and white. It just isn't.

 

[sharon]

I've never heard of that drink before. Bleh, it sounds disgusting. But now that you mention it and based on the evidence, specualtion yes but also highly plausible. Suppose, he had cough syrup at home? Neither the Skittles or the juice coctail had been opened, which suggests he was saving them til he got home instead of consuming them along the way.

He bought the Skittles for Chad.

 

[Caine]

He bought the Skittles for Chad.

So he could get chad ****ed up on some "fire ass lean."

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Not really. You have a teen age African-American with a chip on his shoulder about "creepy ass cracka"s looking at him. His solution?? He goes and ....how did Ms Janteel describe it, "whupped ass" on him. Didn't turn out very well this time. The person TM decided to go postal on had a gun.

How's that different than a mugging?

If you reversed that - you'd have the same, true statement.

They were both thugs, both causing trouble, evidently - and no evidence came out during the entire investigation and trial that proved otherwise. The only ball that Zimmerman has is he called 911, but that was before he acted - not after. This is an example of 'when things go really wrong and no one else is around to see it.'

And because one is dead and there were no eyewitnesses - we have Zimmerman's word, a smattering of evidence that amounts to nothing, and mere personal opinions.

 

[Crosscheck]

So he could get chad ****ed up on some "fire ass lean."

And you got a link to them doing this drug or just how you view all black teens?

 

[sharon]

So he could get chad ****ed up on some "fire ass lean."

LOLOLOL.. Your have to be kidding.. What a low down accusation without a shred of evidence.

 

[AmericanbyChoic]

I'm not moved - while I'm ok with the ruling I'm not ok with the idea that he 'did absolutely nothing wrong'

If he's consumed by guilt and harassed forever then that's what he gets for confronting someone with a firearm.

Zimmerman did not confront Trayvon… He watched Trayvon, (which, just to be clear, is what NEIGHBORHOOD >>>WATCH<<< does…) lost track of him and was then jumped and viscously beaten, until he pulled his sidearm and defended himself through the effective use of his sidearm.

Possessing a firearm, when one is jumped and viscously attacked, cannot reasonably be construed to represent that one 'confronting someone with a firearm'…

 

[Caine]

And you got a link to them doing this drug or just how you view all black teens?

Attempt to accuse me of racism....... DENIED!

 

[Caine]

LOLOLOL.. Your have to be kidding.. What a low down accusation without a shred of evidence.

See above.

 

[sharon]

Attempt to accuse me of racism....... DENIED!

Have you authenticated those tweets?

 

[Excon]

You should check out the texts. Entertained me for a whole day. Almost started a thread on it, but the verdict came in and everybodys attention shifted so...

They're on the gzlegal site. I posted the link in another thread but didn't save it. Defendants third supplemental discovery.

Figuring out who said what in multi-party conversations in at least three output formats, all heavily redacted and written in slang and abbreviations was a blast.

Painted the picture I expected actually. M wasn't a bad kid. Turns out as best I can figure that all the gun stuff was one episode of him getting a friend a gun to protect themselves from their dad's gun-crazy girlfriend. Not the best solution, maybe, but all the gun stuff seems to be around this one time for this one attempted purchase. Ultimately the person got their own .38 for a hundred dollars.

Like I said, I think you would find it interesting and fun to puzzle through.

Spin!

 

[Excon]

a smattering of evidence that amounts to nothing,

Wrong!
We have very much evidence that support and corroborates Zimmerman's account.

 

[Crosscheck]

Attempt to accuse me of racism....... DENIED!

Was that made by the same folks who made the fake fight video of blacks beating up a white guy? I know many of you were fooled by that too.

 

[Caine]

Have you authenticated those tweets?

Was that made by the same folks who made the fake fight video of blacks beating up a white guy? I know many of you were fooled by that too.

Accept it or not (I didn't expect you to, its impossible to get someone to concede they were wrong around here).

I cares not.

 

[What if...?]

Attempt to accuse me of racism....... DENIED!

Is that in evidence somewhere?

It wasn't in that dump with the texts and pictures, as far as I could tell.

 

[Moot]

He bought the Skittles for Chad.

To be honest, I didn't pay much attention to the Skittles angle. But now that I've read a bit about "blunts" and "lean" and the unaccounted for time between leaving the 7-11 and Zimmerman first noticing him....he could have smoked a "blunt". Or suppose the "blunt" was still in Martin's pocket when Zimmerman first saw him and not knowing if a Zimmerman was a cop, he took off running so he could hide it and then circle back round to confront Zimmerman...or he could have just waited for Zimmerman to catch up.

And it is also highly plausible that Martin bought the Skittles for his brother, Chad...but whose not really his brother. So the question is, what was 14yr old Chad going to do with the Skittles? Make some "lean" and "smoke some blunt" during the NFL game with Trayvon, perhaps? But then lots of people get stoned and have a few drinks during football games. Probably half the country at least. But none of that has anything to directly to do with Martins killing, so I guess thats why I didn't follow the Skittle angle very closely. Instead I focused on the evidence in the immediate moments of the attack to see if it was really self defense...and I concluded way back when that technically it was...but it seemed to have a lot mitigating circumstance to suggest that Zimmerman was culpable because he chased after Martin instead of staying in his vechicle like he was supposed to. He created the situation, he was the aggressor first, he had the advantage over Martin, and he knew that the police were coming. What advantage over Zimmerman did Martin have...he had no idea who or what the creep following him wanted. It is Martin that acted according the SYG law because he stood his ground against a threat with the only weapons he had, his fists. So in the course of standing his ground, Martin is the one who gets shot.

 

[Excon]

a lot mitigating circumstance to suggest that Zimmerman was culpable

WTF? There is no mitigating circumstances at all.

because he chased after Martin

There was no chase.

instead of staying in his vechicle like he was supposed to.

Supposed to?
Where do you come up with that nonsense?
He wasn't supposed to do any such thing.

He created the situation, he was the aggressor first,

Not!
Zimmerman's actions were all legal.
Trayvon was the one who was the first aggressor. He approached Zimmerman. He confronted Zimmerman, he then swung on and struck Zimmerman.
Trayvon brought this all upon himself.



The trial is over, don't you think you should have at least learned the evidence by now?

 

[Crosscheck]

its impossible to get someone to concede they were wrong around here).

That statement there is worth the whole discussion. Kind of a private joke but enjoyable just the same.

What I don't understand is for a year people have been fighting about whether or not Martin was stoned on marijuana. Some argued the THC level was so low that it could have been smoked days before and others thought the level was appropriate for very recent use. No one during that time had been stating as far as I could remember he was high on Skittle Tea. Then as evidence you have a supposed text that reeks of a poor attempt to sound "ghetto".
Did that same text include the names of the Asiana pilots too?

 

[Moot]

WTF? There is no mitigating circumstances at all.

Yes there is and I've already posted the evidence so don't bother asking for it.

There was no chase.

Yes there is and I've already posted the evidence so don't bother asking for it.

Supposed to?
Where do you come up with that nonsense?
He wasn't supposed to do any such thing.

Yes he was, there were rules for neighborhood watch and Zimmerman knew the rules and didn't follow them....

"...The police department official who worked with George Zimmerman on establishing a neighborhood watch program at a gated community in Sanford, Fla., testified Tuesday that members of such groups were not supposed to follow suspicious people and were told to stand aside and allow the police to do their jobs....read"

Rules for neighborhood watch discussed in George Zimmerman trial - latimes.com

Not!
Zimmerman's actions were all legal.
Trayvon was the one who was the first aggressor. He approached Zimmerman. He confronted Zimmerman, he then swung on and struck Zimmerman. Trayvon brought this all upon himself.

Trayvon was being followed by someone who could have been a serial killer for all he knew. Trayvon tried to run away and Zimmerman pursued him until he was advised not to by the police dispatcher. At that point, Trayvon probably had more right to stand his ground than Zimmerman did.

The trial is over, don't you think you should have at least learned the evidence by now?

How come you haven't?

 

[ric27]

Yes there is and I've already posted the evidence so don't bother asking for it.

Yes there is and I've already posted the evidence so don't bother asking for it.

Yes he was, there were rules for neighborhood watch and Zimmerman knew the rules and didn't follow them....



Trayvon was being followed by someone who could have been a serial killer for all he knew. Trayvon tried to run away and Zimmerman pursued him until he was advised not to by the police dispatcher. At that point, Trayvon probably had more right to stand his ground than Zimmerman did.


How come you haven't?

If that's, the case then...why, the state's epic fail to prove M2/manslaughter and complete deterioration/fiasco to disprove self defense?

 

[Excon]

How come you haven't?

iLOL
:doh
:lamo
You are the one showing that you do not know the evidence, or the applicability of that you do know.

Yes there is and I've already posted the evidence so don't bother asking for it.

No there wasn't and no you haven't. So you are telling a lie. There is no mitigating circumstances against him at all.

Yes there is and I've already posted the evidence so don't bother asking for it.

No there wasn't and no you haven't. So you either do not know the evidence or are purposely telling a lie. There was no chase. He followed in his vehicle.
He then got out and followed on foot only to stop doing so. There was no chase.

Yes he was, there were rules for neighborhood watch and Zimmerman knew the rules and didn't follow them....

He wasn't on NW, but on his way to the store.

And secondly.
He is not beholden to any NW rules. Nor are they rules. But guidelines.
Nor can those guidelines prevent him from acting the way he did, as his actions were legal.

Trayvon tried to run away and Zimmerman pursued him until he was advised not to by the police dispatcher. At that point, Trayvon probably had more right to stand his ground than Zimmerman did.

Wrong!
Trayvon was not standing any ground, but unlawfully attacking.

Trayvon approached Zimmerman and circled him. That shows he was not trying to get away, but was trying to intimidate him.
There was no pursuit. Trayvon went South and had more than enough time to get home. While Zimmerman went East and then came back West. When Trayvon approached Zimmerman from his rear when Zimmerman was not a threat of any sorts. Did you get that? From his rear.
He approached yelling his question and immediately stuck Zimmerman upon arrival. That is an attack.
Trayvon's actions are not those of a person in fear.

 

[Moot]

If that's, the case then...why, the state's epic fail to prove M2/manslaughter and complete deterioration/fiasco to disprove self defense?

Analysts could go on for days discussing that.

 

[ric27]

Analysts could go on for days discussing that.

It's a done deal

Z was found not guilty

 

[joko104]

I didn't listen yet . . . but I'd heard a photo of a gun (couldn't tell whose hand was holding it), some text messages indicating that Trayvon was either buying or selling a gun, a text from Trayvon about his losing a fight because "the guy got on top of me and I couldn't defend myself," picture of MJ plants . . . that's all I remember. Now I'll watch the video.

Wow. I hadn't heard about "a punch to the nose wins the fight." Well, it'll all come out in any civil suit, that's for sure.

The "if you punch someone in the nose you win the fight" was singularly the most relevant and important FACT (not subjective or speculation) about TM of all. And it was kept out, while allowing evidence about GZ and physical combat allowed in. To me, that made it 100% clear the judge was NOT impartial.

That Corey hide that evidence for months is basis for sanctions both in terms of attorney fees and against her law license.

 

[joko104]

Yes there is and I've already posted the evidence so don't bother asking for it.

Yes there is and I've already posted the evidence so don't bother asking for it.

Yes he was, there were rules for neighborhood watch and Zimmerman knew the rules and didn't follow them....



Trayvon was being followed by someone who could have been a serial killer for all he knew. Trayvon tried to run away and Zimmerman pursued him until he was advised not to by the police dispatcher. At that point, Trayvon probably had more right to stand his ground than Zimmerman did.


How come you haven't?

PLEASE EXPLAIN THE LEGAL AUTHORITY OF AND LEGAL DUTY TO COMPLY WITH "NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH" GUIDELINES.

Cite a source, any source. That claim has always been totally false.