• 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.

Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman

Status
Not open for further replies.

considering the bull**** Zimmy said about Martin on the 911 call, and his history of obsessively calling 911, beating a cop, beating a woman, and being a one-man neighborhood watch who fails to follow the advice of the police...I see no reason to believe Zimmerman.
 
joko104 said:
But they will rage you are violating Martin's juvenile privacy and trying to harm his reputation out of cruelty by writing that.
Click to expand...

Martin was never arrested or convicted for any crimes. Unlike Zimmy, who was arrested multiple times and pleaded guilty to several charges.
 
Ockham said:
So the 4th amendment statement you made was irrelevant.

Yet that's what you inferred... without the 4th amendment cops would be having target practice with little black boys in the street. It's a waste to use the cutesy stuff on me.
Click to expand...

I missed the part of the tape in which Zimmerman told the police Martin had Skittles. What second-point is that?

You wrote: "Cops would have been having target practice with little black boys in the street."

I claim that is a 100%, absolutely grotesque lie and that you know so.

Prove it. Prove before the Supreme Court ruling cops were target practicing with little black boys in the street? There are thousands of police departments, prove that you did nothing but post a particularly grotesquely false statement and you overall raging isn't just your hatred of cops in general?


I think that pretty much ends your credibility or respectability.
 
Thunder said:
Martin was never arrested or convicted for any crimes. Unlike Zimmy, who was arrested multiple times and pleaded guilty to several charges.
Click to expand...

My gosh, how many times have you posted that outright lie now? 5, 10? 15?
 
What if...? said:
You do realize that the girlfriends account and Zimmermans are NOT THE SAME, right?
Click to expand...

Have you read the police reports reporting on their interrogation of her? I didn't think so.

I'm starting to get a little sick of DP posters who have a lynch mob mentality with this guy. We don't have all the facts. We have bits and pieces and sound bytes and media spin and Sharpton hype and Jackson hype and anybody else who decides to throw their hat in the ring for political hay.

I don't know where you stand on the issue . . . or how strongly you feel . . . so this isn't directed at you. I'm merely addressing your specific post.
 
MaggieD said:
Have you read the police reports reporting on their interrogation of her? I didn't think so.
Click to expand...

Whats ironic is that the police can easily corroborate what someone said in an interrogation room. They at the very least audio record all their interviews.
 
This has nothing to do with what I said or the comment of yours that I was responding to.

In response to Hatuey saying, "It's still racial profiling", you said, "great. individuals should." I'm telling you that I think you're wrong because it's stupid to deem anyone of a certain race a danger.
 
Thunder said:
he should have stayed in his car, like a good little wanna-be cop.
Click to expand...

From a strictly legal standpoint, thats immaterial ...inside, outside of the car...Who gives a **** :shock:

The point is... Who made a choice to engage in aggravated assault?
 
Thunder said:
and what if Zimmy continued to fight back?
Click to expand...

And what if pigs flew out his arse? If Zimmerman had gotten up and continued the fight then lil tray would have been justified in continuing. But that's not what happened
 
Ockham said:
Well, Zimmermans statements are being used as racist fodder --- that there actually were "breakins involving black males", does that now make it non-racist and factual? Or is it still a racist comment as many in this thread are contending?
Click to expand...

I have been unconvinced this was racially MOTIVATED from day one.

Apart from the recent break ins involving "black males" I suspect Zimmerman would have been suspiscious of ANYBODY who was unfamiliar.

And he didn't know Martin was on the phone. People talking on headsets often appear "odd" to people who aren't aware thwy are doing so.
 

That's the truth. Body language when speaking would appear to be positively weird if one didn't know the other person was on the phone. Good point.
 
MaggieD said:
I never thought anything he said was a racial comment. As for the unknown sound byte maybe calling them "coons"? If he did say that, then I would change my opinion and call him racist.
Click to expand...

Simply saying the word "coon" = racist? You should have a conversation with Redress about that... :lol:
 
What if...? said:
You do realize that the girlfriends account and Zimmermans are NOT THE SAME, right?
Click to expand...

The difference is trivial with no real bearing on anything.

Zimmerman says Martin approached him and said "what's your problem?" while the girlfriend says Martin approached him and said "why are you following me?". It's reasonable to believe Martin approached Zimmerman and wanted to know why he was being followed regardless of how the teenager choose to phrase the question.

I think it says a lot about this case that the knocks against Zimmerman are this trivial.
 
Last edited:
Ockham said:
Simply saying the word "coon" = racist? You should have a conversation with Redress about that... :lol:
Click to expand...

Well, actually, I'm a bit ambivalent about that myself. I started to post that, "In and of itself, I don't think it's racist," but then I got to thinking about the people I know who would use that word, and they are indeed racist. So I changed it.
 
OscarB63 said:
And what if pigs flew out his arse? If Zimmerman had gotten up and continued the fight then lil tray would have been justified in continuing. But that's not what happened
Click to expand...

So here's the lipmus test: You see someone in your gated community who looks suspicious - or is acting suspicious. You know there has been a rash of break ins and you follow the person, lose them and are then confronted by them. They attack you, get you on the ground and start pounding your head in the pavement.

You have a gun - do you pull it and shoot? Or do you not pull it ... I would expect a majority of people would pull it- possibly to stop the other person from hitting them, or to pull it and fire. I think a minority would not pull the gun. I can fault Zimmerman for a few things... but I can't fault him for pulling the gun and firing IF - IF it all went down like he said it did. That also doesn't mean Zimmerman isn't responsible for the kids death here...
 
ThePlayDrive said:
I'm telling you that I think you're wrong because it's stupid to deem anyone of a certain race a danger.
Click to expand...

If you gather your data and it pops out that 98% of your targets are black, white or green, then you should be looking most closely where you are getting 98% of your hits.
 

Agreed. However, just because he is responsible for the kid's death doesn't mean he is legally guilty of a crime.
 

I've tried to be meticulous about qualifying my reliance on her testimony to make points.

When she made her statement and how much of Zims statement she was aware of when she made it are unclear at this time and I've tried to make it clear that her story is subject to debate until such time as these questions are resolved.

My only point is that her story differs substantively from Zims. His is FAR more confrontational than hers, and calls into question whether the physical altercation began as Zim was walking back to his truck or when they encountered each other after Zim caught up with Martin again.

Add this to the fact that AT THE TIME no one at the scene was aware of the call-in-progress until later.

So IF she was unaware of Zims testimony when she made hers we have conflicting stories as to the beginning of the physical altercation upon which this episode hinges.

Reasonable doubt as to the veracity of Zims story.

If she was aware of Zims account, the veracity of HER story comes into doubt.

I keep bringing up in response to all of the "eyewitnesses corroborate Zims testimony" statements.

The ONLY "eye" witness to the events leading up to the shooting tells a significantly different story than that related by Zim.
 
Thunder said:
and what if Zimmy continued to fight back?
Click to expand...

Zimmy, you've grown an affection for him. :lol:

You mean if he continues to fight back while on the ground getting his head caved in? He gets to shoot Martin at that point.
 

Zimmerman also makes no mention of reestablishing visual contact with Martin after initially losing him. In his version he gives up and is walking back to his truck when he is approached from behind by Martin.

In the girlfriends account, Zimmerman reappears and the verbal exchange takes place.

Its not just the words.

We don't have all of her statement and don't know its timing, but if what she relays is accurate we have two substantially different accounts of the moments leading up to the physical altercation.
 
What if...? said:
We don't have all of her statement and don't know its timing, but if what she relays is accurate we have two substantially different accounts of the moments leading up to the physical altercation.
Click to expand...

Before, I get into that

Lets look at lying for a moment, shall we?

It is a crime to lie?
 

It has to be just words though.

I had to state the obvious but Martin's girlfriend wasn't actually there. She can't give any visual evidence of what took place.
 
ric27 said:
Before, I get into that

Lets look at lying for a moment, shall we?

It is a crime to lie?
Click to expand...

In some contexts yes, in others no.

Under oath or when an affidavit is made, yes.

Making false statements to a police officer is also usually a crime.

Me lying to you, not to my knowledge.

Not really sure what you're getting at here...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.