• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Trayvon Martin Video Shows No Blood or Bruises on George Zimmerman [W:1041]

Again that is irrelevant, the "witness" is not evidence, and that "witness" is a liar.

What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

Zimmerman followed him and instigated a fight.

What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

He had a right to defend himself and beat the racist stalker to a pulp

What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

...especially if he's a 250 pound brute following the person in the dark.

What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

And if what Zimmerman claimed was true about having his head slammed into the pavement several times, he would probably be dead or seriously injured now

Pure speculation.

(as the racists delicately emphasize so much in order to paint TM in a bad light as nothing but a black punk thug)

Who are you talking about?



The point is the motive and premeditation, and Zimmerman's fat ass had both.

What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

Epic fail, as they say these days.

I couldn't agree more.
 
What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

This type of dumb question shines light on your irrationality, along with your inability to spell correctly.

If you really have to ask me what evidence do I have to substantiate whether the person who claims to have seen what happened is not evidence then you need to go back to school.

What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

When will you spell correctly and look at the evidence?

What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

When will you spell correctly and look at the evidence?

What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

When will you spell correctly and look at the evidence?

Pure speculation.

When you've taken a few medic courses and gained common sense, come back to me when you're ready for debate.

Who are you talking about?

Who do you think I'm talking about? Don't act dumbstruck.

What evidence do you have to substanciate that?

When will you spell correctly and look at the evidence?

I couldn't agree more.

I don't agree with irrational people.
 
So the answer MJ, is "none".

Just as we all knew.
 
Re: Police video of Zimmerman; no broken nose, no bruises, no blood???

Trayvon Martin Video Shows No Blood or Bruises on George Zimmerman - Yahoo! News

wtf is going on??????????

no blood.

no bruises.

no trip to the ER.

no bandages or bandades.

not the fat boy reported in the news



....again I ask, wtf is going on here?



also, Martin's girlfriend told ABC News that the Sanford Police has NOT interviewed her.

The 16-year-old girl, who is only being identified as DeeDee, recounted the final moments of her conversation with Martin before the line went dead.

"When he saw the man behind him again he said this man is going to do something to him. And then he said this man is still behind him and I said run," she said.

Phone records obtained by ABC News show that the girl called Martin at 7:12 p.m., five minutes before police arrived, and remained on the phone with Martin until moments before he was shot.

DeeDee said Martin turned around and asked Zimmerman why he was following him.

"The man said what are you doing around here?" DeeDee recalled Zimmerman saying.

She said she heard someone pushed into the grass before the call was dropped.






something is very wrong here. very, very wrong.

Sounds like Zimmerman kept following despite the 911 operator telling him not to
 
Re: Police video of Zimmerman; no broken nose, no bruises, no blood???

Sounds like Zimmerman kept following despite the 911 operator telling him not to

Well, according to the TV movie, dispatchers have no Power Ranger powers
 
ok...

A Justifiable self defense - The defendant (Zim) who is completely without fault, is attacked with deadly force by Martin. In that case, Zim is not required to retreat and may stand his ground and repel the attack by force, including deadly force, if necessary.

B Excusable self defense. This arises when the accused has *some fault* in precipitating the encounter, but abandons the encounter, retreats as far as he can and is nonetheless pursued by the aggressor. It is excusable under those circumstances to use appropriate force to repel the attack.

Its clearly A because, the entire or whole purpose of your using deadly force is to STOP an aggressor from completing whatever action it is he or she is doing that is putting you in fear for your life. The goal is not to kill...it is to stop

The grey areas are....

1 Shooting to kill - Martin stops whatever, he was doing to Zim...but, Zim had already decided that Martin must die and Zim was not going to stop for anything less.

2 Shooting to wound - Zim was not really in fear for his life at the time, Zim shot and therefore, Zim must have used excessive force. Zim now, becomes the primary aggressor. Both kill/wound scenarios beg for criminal prosecution.
I have zero interest in your or others' theories. I'm simply pointing out facts, and -- the part that keeps me really busy -- non-facts.

But really.... "shooting to wound"? :lamo
 
Pretty sure I read on one of these threads that if scenario was the same but Zimmerman were black, he would have been arrested. Here is a case of "self defense" where the unarmed man was a white-hispanic shot by a black man claiming the victim had a bat. No bat was found on the scene. Guy was never arrested. Where is the outrage???

Police: Man shot, killed at Phoenix fast food drive-thru - CBS 5 - KPHO
Not even close... someone accompanying the shooter said that the deceased was swinging (attacking), and an independent witness said the deceased was swinging (attacking).

Major fail.
 
I have zero interest in your or others' theories. I'm simply pointing out facts, and -- the part that keeps me really busy -- non-facts.

But really.... "shooting to wound"? :lamo

People tend to **** up their statements after a shooting without counsel....

There is a reason no law enforcement agency teaches you to shoot to wound. It ain't legally justifiable use of lethal force....

I don't give a rat's ass if you shoot him in the forehead or in his foot.... it is deadly force. You are justified in it's use or you are not. You are going to loose your ass in court (civil and criminal) when you explain to the jury why you shot to wound. Shooting to wound implies you were not *in fear for your life*, A critical piece of the whole justifiable use of deadly force thingy.
 
People tend to **** up their statements after a shooting without counsel....

There is a reason no law enforcement agency teaches you to shoot to wound. It ain't legally justifiable use of lethal force....

I don't give a rat's ass if you shoot him in the forehead or in his foot.... it is deadly force. You are justified in it's use or you are not. You are going to loose your ass in court (civil and criminal) when you explain to the jury why you shot to wound. Shooting to wound implies you were not *in fear for your life*, A critical piece of the whole justifiable use of deadly force thingy.
When you get done arguing with yourself, do let us know who won.

And a video might be interesting..... :2razz:
 
Not even close... someone accompanying the shooter said that the deceased was swinging (attacking), and an independent witness said the deceased was swinging (attacking).

Major fail.

He was also mentally handicapped
 
He was also mentally handicapped
Assuming that is true, how is it relevant?

Wouldn't that make your red herring even more unlike the Zimmerman/Martin case?

Debating tip: When you read the word "fail" used to describe your post, you might want to give up on that line of argument. 'Cut your losses', so to speak.
 
So the answer MJ, is "none".

Just as we all knew.

So the answer is that you have no compatible argument nor evidence to support your claims that TM tried to kill Fatty ZimmerFaggot but just resort to loud frothing shouts in an attempt to stay in the debate.

Predictable, yet unimpressive.
 
People tend to **** up their statements after a shooting without counsel....

See what I mean Karl?LOL I told you they were going to use an out of the blue statement like the above to excuse the actions of a murderer!:lamo

They'll use absolutely anything to discredit ironclad evidence.
 
Assuming that is true, how is it relevant?

Wouldn't that make your red herring even more unlike the Zimmerman/Martin case?

Debating tip: When you read the word "fail" used to describe your post, you might want to give up on that line of argument. 'Cut your losses', so to speak.

Thanks for the tip.

A mentally handicapped unarmed man was gunned down and killed. Sounds similar to an unarmed 17yr old with skittles and ice tea gunned down and killed. Not sure why there is outrage from one and not the other. Alachua County NAACP President Evelyn Foxx said “Everyone was there pleading for justice for Trayvon. It doesn't matter whose child it was. It could have been a yellow child, a red child, a white child -- there was no justice, and we have to have justice to live a wholesome life as Americans.” Well, if they mean that, now is the time to show it.

Sorry you can't see the total hypocrisy in this.
 
Pretty sure I read on one of these threads that if scenario was the same but Zimmerman were black, he would have been arrested. Here is a case of "self defense" where the unarmed man was a white-hispanic shot by a black man claiming the victim had a bat. No bat was found on the scene. Guy was never arrested. Where is the outrage???

Police: Man shot, killed at Phoenix fast food drive-thru - CBS 5 - KPHO


There is a good argument if Zimmerman were black, he would be arrested but it is pure speculation in this particular case.
 
I actually think this is one of those cases, SYG aside, where Zs negligence/poor judgement would be addressed civilly.

I'm not sure that would be appropriate. Z isn't rich, so he'd just be crushed under a judgement he could never pay. And money won't bring back Martin.

Personally, and unrealistically in the real world, I think Martins dad deserves at least two "free shots" at Z, hands behind his back. One would do, except M DIED. SOMETHING to discourage others from rushing in where angels fear to tread.
I agree. The lawyer for Martin better prepare for a wrongful death suit. However, it is not out of the realm of possiblity to charge him with manslaughter based on his poor judgement of following Marting. It indirectly lead to the fatal tragedy.
 
Thanks for the tip.

A mentally handicapped unarmed man was gunned down and killed. Sounds similar to an unarmed 17yr old with skittles and ice tea gunned down and killed. [...]
Only if you leave out 99.73% of the context, so -- no, it doesn't.

You should have taken the tip :shrug:
 
I agree. The lawyer for Martin better prepare for a wrongful death suit. However, it is not out of the realm of possiblity to charge him with manslaughter based on his poor judgement of following Marting. It indirectly lead to the fatal tragedy.
'fraid not... the SYG statute gives Zimmerman a get out of jail card, based on the evidence known to us at this time. Same with any civil suit -- immunity. Section 776.041.
 
lol
Lots more you say?

The only thing that may be new is the girlfriend's statement which is consistent with Zimmerman's. It possibly came out after the initial investigation was concluded.
That makes her statement suspect, if it did.
But from what we know of it, it is still consistent.

Everything else that has come out was known when the following statement was made.
Everything.
"The evidence and testimony we have so far does not establish that Mr. Zimmerman did not act in self defense. We don't have anything to dispute his claim of self-defense, at this point, with the evidence and testimony that we have,"
Fatal shooting of Florida teen turned over to state attorney - CNN.com



Anybody with any sense can see that saying such is all hooey based on nothing but speculation.


They didn't drop the ball.
Any mistakes that may have been made would not have affected the conclusion that he acted in self-defense. None.

The 911 call is not speculation. That he made a racial slur is not speculation. He was told to quit following him, but he continued. Quit trying to cover up for him like his father, and brother who weren't even there and speak as if they were.

His lawyer is now claiming he will use the "Shaken Baby Syndrome" - which will make for a laugh if it goes to trial, as it only applies to "babies". Of course, now Mr. Macho is acting like a baby, not wanting to admit the truth.
 
The 911 call is not speculation. That he made a racial slur is not speculation. He was told to quit following him, but he continued. Quit trying to cover up for him like his father, and brother who weren't even there and speak as if they were.

The racial slur is total speculation. In fact the CNN reporter who initially started it all is now backing off.
*****************************************************************************

US CNN Enhances Zimmerman 911 Call Again — And Reporter Now Doubts Racial Slur Used
Posted on April 5, 2012 at 8:39am by Jonathon M. Seidl

Recently, CNN enhanced audio of George Zimmerman — the man who shot Trayvon Martin — to try and determine if he did, in fact, use a racial slur while calling police on the night of the shooting. Back then, it sounded like Zimmerman might have used the phrase “fu**ing coons,” and his critics have cited it as evidence of a racially-motivated attack. But now CNN has enhanced the audio again, and the reporter is casting doubts that the term was used.


“It certainly sounds like that word to me,” Gary Tuckman said when the audio was first enhanced. But after the latest enhancement, he’s not so sure:


“Now it does sound less like that racial slur.… From listening in this room, and this is a state-of-the-art room, it doesn’t sound like that slur anymore. It sounds like … we‘re hearing the swear word at first and then the word ’cold.’ And the reason some say that would be relevant, is because it was unseasonably cold in Florida that night and raining.”

The audio expert agreed it sounded like “cold,” and said the new method gets rid of a lot more background noise but doesn’t change the voice or words.
 
That he made a racial slur is not speculation. He was told to quit following him, but he continued.

He did not make a racial slur, and continuing to follow him, if that's what he in fact did, was not illegal and doesn't make him the aggressor.
 
Repeatedly, it said this case is still under investigation. Nowhere did the police chief or the DA come out and said the evidence or injury of the shooter is consistent with his claim of self-defense or that there is nothing contradicting the shooter's claim as if to justify the killing and case closed.
Said like a true obfuscator.

What you say is not true.

Mr. Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time
was supported by physical evidence and testimony.

Official release from Sanford City Manager, quoting Chief of Police, March 23, 2012


From an article dated March 15, quoting the Chief of Police.
"The evidence and testimony we have so far does not establish that Mr. Zimmerman did not act in self defense. We don't have anything to dispute his claim of self-defense, at this point, with the evidence and testimony that we have,"
Fatal shooting of Florida teen turned over to state attorney - CNN.com


That is what they had at the end of the last investigation, and that is what they had at the start of the new investigation.
The only new evidence that we are aware of, is the suspect statement of girlfriend.


That's why Trayvon's case is very important to be heard and decided in court. After all the evidence been presented and decision given, then we would either have the answer or the laws that allow this to happen need to be revisited and changed, otherwise this country will be in a lot of mess from now on. More cases as this will be common.
A person should not be charged with a crime unless it is believed by the authorities, and supported by evidence, that they have committed a crime.

In this case what have the authorities already told us?
Oh, that's right!
Mr. Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time was supported by physical evidence and testimony.
&
"The evidence and testimony we have so far does not establish that Mr. Zimmerman did not act in self defense. We don't have anything to dispute his claim of self-defense, at this point, with the evidence and testimony that we have,"


Unless that evidence changes there is absolutely no reason to charge him, let alone take it to court.




Sounds like Zimmerman kept following despite the 911 operator telling him not to
He was not told "not to".
See quotes below.




The 911 call is not speculation.
That is right it is not.
And the screams that can be heard on the 911 recording have been identified by a eye-witness as belonging to Zimmerman.


That he made a racial slur is not speculation.
Whether he did or did not is all speculation at this time.


He was told to quit following him, but he continued.
Mar 22, 2012
Lee, the police chief, said in a statement that the police dispatcher's "suggestion" to Zimmerman that he did not need to follow Martin "is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmermann would be required to follow."
'Stand Your Ground Law' at center of Fla. shooting - Yahoo! News



Or if you prefer from CNN, March 15, 2012.
Lee said the 911 directions asking Zimmerman not to confront the teenager are not mandatory instructions.

"That is a call taker making a recommendation to him. He's not under a legal obligation to do that, so that is not something we can charge him with," he said.

Fatal shooting of Florida teen turned over to state attorney - CNN.com


Quit trying to cover up for him like his father, and brother who weren't even there and speak as if they were.
No one here is trying to cover anything up. But I would suggest you stop trying to convict a man who did not act in an unlawful manner.


His lawyer is now claiming he will use the "Shaken Baby Syndrome" - which will make for a laugh if it goes to trial, as it only applies to "babies". Of course, now Mr. Macho is acting like a baby, not wanting to admit the truth.
That is not what the Lawyer is claiming.
"We're familiar with the Shaken Baby Syndrome," said Uhrig on the CBS This Morning program. "You shake a baby, the brain shakes around inside the skull. You can die when someone's pounding your head into the ground."
Trayvon Martin Case: George Zimmerman Lawyer Cites 'Shaken Baby Syndrome' As Defense

Using an example to illustrate the severity of what was occurring is not invoking or even claiming he will use the "Shaken Baby Syndrome".
 
I am saying it is an assumption on your part.
The news reports indicate that her last call was at 7:12. And the last time she talked to him it lasted 4 minutes.

But her statements say her last call did not get answered, which makes what I presented possible.


But as you say, you can not find it.
Which means you are relying on your memory.
So yeah, you are assuming.

That in no way impugns your honesty.


A pdf file I remember being posted, was of Zimmerman's call logs to the police.
Not that that was what you were thinking, or even talking about.
Not saying it is, but is it possible that you have transposed memories?

I have been looking since you made this claim again for a full call log. I haven't found one. Only the initial report from ABC with the small image.
I am going to assume that if it existed, it would be all over the the net.

All this is what has been released by the family lawyer.
What's odd is that they did not use her call log, but instead used his. And a very limited image of it at that.
All of this was done for a reason.

Found it! Finally reminded of the 400 minute claim and modified my search with it an there it was.

NBC Miami : Phone Call Contradicts Shooter's Claim: Lawyer

Scroll down to the "400 minute" hyperlink and you'll find the pdf of seven pages of the call record. The image we've seen is from the last page of the pdf.

Still not sure if it is Martins or the GFs.
 
Found it! Finally reminded of the 400 minute claim and modified my search with it an there it was.

NBC Miami : Phone Call Contradicts Shooter's Claim: Lawyer

Scroll down to the "400 minute" hyperlink and you'll find the pdf of seven pages of the call record. The image we've seen is from the last page of the pdf.

Still not sure if it is Martins or the GFs.
Thank you for that.
Here is the actual link.
http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/call+log.pdf


Right off the bat, it doesn't match with the previously provided image.
There has been some type of editing going on. (not mine)
This makes me even more apprehensive of the girls story.

log.jpg
TimeWarner8.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom