ThePlayDrive
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2011
- Messages
- 19,610
- Reaction score
- 7,647
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I posted new information. This information upsets you. That's all I've learned from this interaction.
I posted new information. This information upsets you. That's all I've learned from this interaction.You are presenting information that does not coincide with the known evidence.
There is nothing to say the eye-witness may be wrong or lying.
In actuality, his statement is corroborated by Zimmerman. Or If you prefer, he corroborates Zimmerman's.
Saying the following does not indicate that was actually what you meant originally.Actually, I haven't ignored which is why I said, "It SOUNDS like coon," instead of, "He said coon."
Zimmerman's reference to Martin as "asshole and f--king coon" gives me the impression of agitation.
You did not 'just' post new info. You posted information that does not coincide with the known evidence.I posted new information. This information upsets you. That's all I've learned from this interaction.
I wonder where they got an accurate sampling of Zimmerman's voice...
You do realize that the second post is not mine?Saying the following does not indicate that was actually what you meant originally.
But if the preceding comment is now how you feel about it -eace
I respect your need to believe that.You did not 'just' post new info. You posted information that does not coincide with the known evidence.
What you posted is irrelevant.
lol
Yeah eh?
Well since the eye-witness says it was Zimmerman, I guess this guy's software just got shown to be very inaccurate.
lol
Wow! Honestly. Talk about grasping.
There is an eye-witness folks. Deal with it.
You know with all this racism stuff out there I want to join in. (Sarcasm.)
Obviously Hispanic males can achieve high pitched voices. (Sarcasm.)
Among my points were how witness account can be different when they happened to witness the event at different time during the fight. As I pointed in the jail cell fight incident, if you witnessed the beginning part of the fight you would describe the burly guy standing over the slim guy who was down on the ground being punched by the big guy. If you witnessed the ending part of the fight you would describe the slim guy raining punches on the burly guy pinned under him at the corner.The problem is what I already stated: "Dolphinocean your city jail story has no pertinence to the incident at hand."
That should be very clear.
Trying to say it shows this...; Or it shows that...; in regards to this incident, is ridiculous.
No, you are twisting the fact. This burly guy said it not just once but at least twice when the officers told him to go sit down. Both time they syncronize with the officers talking to him. The slim guy was just laying there and no officer was engaging in any talk with him at that point in time. Read the comments under the Youtube by other posters who view it without any agenda tied to Trayvon's case as Trayvon's case hadn't occurred yet and you will see many posters were laughing at this burly guy's audacity at bold face lie. Go read all their comments for yourself and then stop lying.And then we have the following:
If you listen carefully enough it sounds like it is the guy who had been tasered speaking. And he continues, with the same voice, to speak about how it went down, and one can see it isn't the other guy, the one you call "burly", talking.
Bro is just a street slang. There are no different set of rules. Again, read the comments under the Youtube video. Almost all of them give high respect for the slim guy and sneered at the wannabe though guy for beating someone for no reason other than helping him out. Go read those comments, they all support my sentiment not yours. Besides, this burly guy was the one who needed to be disciplined if not beaten for talking so loud at midnight without regards for others who were trying to catch some nap in the jail cell bench or floor.1. That wasn't his bro.
2. He wasn't minding his own business. Makes him wrong from the get.
3. While not minding his own business, he corrected the guy. Makes him even more wrong.
Maybe you missed my reply to Caine, it might help you understand a bit more.
What he did shouldn't upset anyone... on the outside.
But you know what they say - When in Rome... But in this Rome, there are two sets of rules. The ones that your jailers say you have to abide by, and the unwritten rules, which if you value your life, you follow.
You do not butt into anyone else's business, even if you are best intentioned.
Please do not misunderstand me. There are two very different sets of rules that we are speaking about.
Even the issue of the guy on the phone disturbing others I agree with you. But that was not the issue and nobody there made it an issue.
If this had not taken place in a custodial setting I would agree that his action was the only thing wrong, but it wasn't.
The other guy was not minding his own business and then made it worse by correcting the guy. That puts him in the wrong from the get.
Will you be attending? If so, enjoy!We're gonna see Gabriel Iglesias here next month I think.
There is no reason to wonder about this.But one thing I wonder.
Eye witnesses are notoriously unreliable.
Yeah, but for - cooperated evidence.I think its perfectly possible that Martin was yelling but because he was on TOP the witness assumed it was the guy on the bottom.
And can be fooled.Voice ID is used in biometric security.
I am referring to my imagination running wild about the daddy judge's involvment in his son's past arrest cases including a felony charge. His father is not involved in Trayvon Martin's case, so get a grip on your "preconceived biased position" whinning. And learn to comprehend the actual position of the discourse.Yes, your imagination is running wild. It is running wild because you do not want to view the evidence objectively, but instead wish to favor a preconceived biased position.
I guess I have to say it again.Among my points were how witness account can be different when they happened to witness the event at different time during the fight. As I pointed in the jail cell fight incident, if you witnessed the beginning part of the fight you would describe the burly guy standing over the slim guy who was down on the ground being punched by the big guy. If you witnessed the ending part of the fight you would describe the slim guy raining punches on the burly guy pinned under him at the corner.
This is just commonsense and can occur in any witnessing phenomenon of any fighting incident not just this case.
No. I haven't twisted anything. It can be seen (barely) that it was the tasered guy speaking towards the end. You are making assumptions based on a crappy video and are failing at your analysis.No, you are twisting the fact. This burly guy said it not just once but at least twice when the officers told him to go sit down. Both time they syncronize with the officers talking to him. The slim guy was just laying there and no officer was engaging in any talk with him at that point in time. Read the comments under the Youtube by other posters who view it without any agenda tied to Trayvon's case as Trayvon's case hadn't occurred yet and you will see many posters were laughing at this burly guy's audacity at bold face lie. Go read all their comments for yourself and then stop lying.
Wrong. Not abiding by those rules can get a person killed in a correctional setting.There are no different set of rules.
Saying it again and again to deflect from the argument isn’t a logical debate point.I guess I have to say it again.
"Dolphinocean your city jail story has no pertinence to the incident at hand."
This part of the fight is so clear that any person viewing this video just once would know who was the one who was say, “ I was asleep, Sir” at least twice.No. I haven't twisted anything. It can be seen (barely) that it was the tasered guy speaking towards the end. You are making assumptions based on a crappy video and are failing at your analysis.
Do we need to do a complete comparative analysis of a video that has no pertinence to the case at hand. That would be stupid.
It can be seen (barely) that it was the tasered guy speaking towards the end
Even though I say you are wrong, I am not saying you are twisting it or even lying. So check yourself.
Wrong. Not abiding by those rules can get a person killed in a correctional setting.
The guy didn't mind his own business and corrected the guy in doing so.
He was wrong from the get in that setting.
And do you think I have any concern what the posters on YouTube are saying in regards to the video?
The video doesn't matter.
It has no pertinence to this case.
Bottom line of this whole ordeal is that there's no way in hell Zimmerman can get a fair trial now.
idk. I think I'd be able to fairly weigh the evidence.
idk about the jury pool there, but nationwide, most people are withholding judgment.
We would expect at least some bruises, cuts and abrasions on the fingers and arms if not elsewhere in the body. But, everything Zimmerman claimed didn't add up.
The high def video out today shows the police officer looking at what appears to be a significant gash to the back of Zimmerman's head.
Higher Definition Police Video Appears To Show Wound On Back Of Zimmerman's Head
Thanks for that, Jerry. But I'll take the eye-witness accounts from police officers over this video. It's too easy to fake that stuff. I do believe he had a gash...just don't put any faith in a video that supposedly just got released. Photo Shop does sneaky things.
Still can't see ****The high def video out today shows the police officer looking at what appears to be a significant gash to the back of Zimmerman's head.
Higher Definition Police Video Appears To Show Wound On Back Of Zimmerman's Head
The high def video out today shows the police officer looking at what appears to be a significant gash to the back of Zimmerman's head.
Higher Definition Police Video Appears To Show Wound On Back Of Zimmerman's Head
Significant gash? Really? I don't see it in the video except what appeared to be a superficial dark shadowy spot that disappeared when Zimmerman started walking and the back of his head was shown under the light as he moved along.The high def video out today shows the police officer looking at what appears to be a significant gash to the back of Zimmerman's head.
Higher Definition Police Video Appears To Show Wound On Back Of Zimmerman's Head
Significant gash? Really? I don't see it in the video except what appeared to be a superficial dark shadowy spot that disappeared when Zimmerman started walking and the back of his head was shown under the light as he moved along.
Like I have been saying, all these evidence, witnessess accounts, Zimmerman's story, etc needed to be examined and cross-examinaed in the court of law. We also want to know what the police did or failed to do in this case. There are a lot of unanswered questions needed to be resolved. To do so, we must first have a trial. And with all the things we know, this case does cry out for a trial.
Will you be attending? If so, enjoy!
There is no reason to wonder about this.
The evidence is corroborated.
Yeah, but for - cooperated evidence.
And can be fooled.
Thank you for letting me know.You do realize that the second post is not mine?
Given what the DA had said (SYGL, which is silly) and done, I don't put my trust on him to do justice in this case. Sorry.If the DA had something, I think they would be prosecuting. You don't take everything to court, unless you think a crime has been committed and have sufficient evidence to prove a case. What do you think WE know? I think this is really all about what YOU feel.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?