Re: George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin Case -- General Discussion #8

by Freckles Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:13 pm

Removed by me.

by Gizmo711 Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:59 pm

art tart wrote:
Gizmo711 shared -

Your right, there is a lot of screaming going on during a fight by the loser. But the big problem here is that Zimmerman DID NOT know (and stated such) that Trayvon was dead (which is why he claims to have gotten on top of Trayvon) So why would Zimmerman have ceased immediately from screaming upon shooting his gun (point blank into Trayvons chest) Either he knew he killed him (so why get on top) or he didn't think he killed him (so why stop screaming instantly?)

And although the loser may be screaming while getting beat up, I don't see how a person can scream without a break in their scream while having their head banged into the pavement. Zimmerman cannot have everything both ways to suit himself, and that's what he seems to be doing with EVERYTHING.

Zimmerman was the pursuer, an altercation ensued and the hunted ended up dead (unarmed hunted). Zimmerman (with his OWN words) never told Trayvon who he was. IF Trayvon did throw some punches he rightfully did so. Why would it be OK for one person to claim self defense and not the other (OH thats right the one that was followed behind dark buildings was dead so he can't speak for himself)

We all know why Zimmerman has a hand full of supporters. Everyone can see what they want to in this case, but the facts are the facts. Trayvon was minding his business just going to buy treats at the local store. Zimmerman was on a hunt, with a loaded gun on him, Zimmerman was mad because of a burglar had gotten away in the past. Zimmerman wanted to be a hero and protect his rental and wife, so everyone (?) was suspect to him, especially a Trayvon Martin with a hoodie on in the rain.

The prosecution will tear Zimmerman apart on that stand.

Gizmo711- you make so many broad generalizations which are not facts, just your opinion yet you don't state is as your opinion. You are right, the facts are the facts and I follow the facts, not the propaganda spewed by the Handler's, the family, etc.

You have absolutey NO IDEA if GZ wanted to be a hero, NO ONE knows that, you can have an opinion but you state it as if it is fact, IT IS NOT A FACT, merely your opinion, a big difference. imo, he did not want to be a hero but then there is no known evidence to support either opinion.

As far as "the State tearing Zimmerman up on the stand," again JUST your opinion, you do not state it as just your opinion. imo, the State's case has slowly unraveled, the State's star witness that was promoted as merely 16 yrs. old, is 18 yrs. old. GZ said he was on bottom, he said he screamed for help, he ask someone to call for 911, his injuries SUPPORT he had the chit beat out of him, they do not support GZ being on top during the alercation. You have clearly convicted GZ since the beginning of the case which is your right, MANY of us have evaluated the evidence and there is still a lot outstanding, but thus far, imo, this case never was a 2nd degree murder case as MANY criminal legal analyst have stated including Derchowitz and NEVER was a 2nd degree murder case but overcharging by Corey to quell racial tension.

You can make any claim you want which is your right, but, the State has to prove it, imo, they can't, there is too much reasonable doubt based on the known evidence. Voir Dire is the most important factor, despite any evidence pro or con, the decision is in their lap.

First, if I am stating it, it IS my opinion, I don't have to keep adding in that it is my opinion. Second, I am going upon what has been told, what has been publicized, and what has been stated by Zimmerman himself. (for obvious reasons we cannot hear from the victim).

Zimmermans OWN words and account of what happened are inconsistant and seeing as we have NO other accounts to depend on, I am discounting anything Zimmerman says as to what happened.

That is MY OPINION and alot of others opinion as well.

Zimmerman is his own worst enemy, he is the one with the bad background, he was the one with the gun (loaded), he is the one that pursued Trayvon.

by Gizmo711 Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:02 pm

George Zimmerman has been charged with "SECOND DEGREE MURDER". I would assume that the prosecution is very well aware of what Zimmerman's account of the incident was. They too don't believe him.

I guess the trial will tell all.

by DebFrmHell Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:51 pm

Freckles wrote:Deb said at 1:12:
clipped---

" He has the injuries consistent with being assaulted, he has two adult witnesses that put him on the ground with TM over him. See W6 and W3. "

Ok. So you are believing these witnesses but not others?
If so, is this not showing favoritism to support your own opinions rather than being objective?

I find it inflammatory to state GZ has injuries sufficient to show GZ was "assaulted" by TM. Where is the evidence TM assaulted GZ? Are you stating IF these two witnesses you believe (to the exclusion of other witnesses) BELIEVE they may have seen TM sitting atop GZ then TM was assaulting GZ?

Was evidence retrieved from TM's clothing to indicate his legs were in contact with GZ?

Was evidence recovered from GZ's clothing to indicate TM's legs were about him?

Where are the defensive wounds on GZ's hands to show he resisted TM if in fact he did?

Way too much supposition to support the evidence.
Better, IMO, to state, I don't know.

Again I ask about the blood seen in one photo but not seen in ANY of the other photos. Let's try the argument the color photo was a first photo and undoctored: Blood from the nose and mouth are apparent yet minutes later, in the PD vid, there is NO evidence of any blood! Did he have his nose packed? Was he sucking on ice cubes to get the swelling down in his lips? What about the big nose swelling seen in the color pic--- IF it was taken as first photo, where on earth did it go in just MINUTES?

Marvel of medicine!

What other witnesses would you like to bring forth? I will be happy to debate you with the pros and cons of their statements. You know me. I love to debate.

It is not a mystery of medical science. He was placed in the patrol car. Smith (?) took his picture one time only it is in his report he also took a picture of TM to ask witnesses if they recognized him but got nowhere with that. Then EMTs cleaned him up. They used Hydrogen Peroxide to do it. There is a least one EMT who said that his head was covered roughly 45% with blood. It is in his report, too. They recommended that he be taken to the CFH for a couple of stitches. There was some confusion as to who they believed was taking GZ to the hospital. They thought LE would do it. LE took him to the station instead since Zimmerman declined to go to the hospital.

EMTs wouldn't pack a nose, ridiculous question, IMO. As far as I know, after you get your nose reset, that is when they pack your nose. Ask KZ she will know the procedure better than I do since I didn't get mine reset.

He was transported to SPD station house, interviewed and photographed again. IMO, you are reaching. It ain't all CSI out there. Read the reports, look at the pictures. It is pretty self-explanatory if you take the time to do it.

I don't know that they did any fiber tests on either TM's or GZ's clothing. One was wearing jeans and the other looks like tan khakis or tan jeans. Either way, I don't know that those types of materials would do much in the way of shedding. I don't recall any mention of it.

I only remember the pictures they took of the upper clothing for both. They are circled to show the mapping. They are labeled alphabetically to match with the results listed.

I don't have my other computer in a place where I can use it easily. I need to find some kind of a smaller desk to put it on so I can use both. All of my links are on that one. Since it was on Mozilla and this one uses IE I cannot marry the favorites.

You have said time and again that you have read through all of this and I find it hard to believe with the questions you ask. Seriously, please take the time to review instead of relying on others to do it for you. It makes for a better debate, IMO.

by Freckles Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:12 pm

Removed by me.

by Guest Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:13 pm

Gizmo711 wrote:George Zimmerman has been charged with "SECOND DEGREE MURDER". I would assume that the prosecution is very well aware of what Zimmerman's account of the incident was. They too don't believe him.

I guess the trial will tell all.

The burden is solely on the State to prove the charges, it is one thing if the State doesn't believe something but they have to have the evidence to prove it, I remind you it is the State that has BELIEVED Crump/DeeDee about the age factor and who knows what else, imo, I can't imagine BDLR lied in open court as to DeeDee's age being 16, but then again BDLR could have chosen to lie. The State doesn't even know who threw the first punch and has admitted so.

imo, the State is going to have a hard time proving their case with the evidence that has been released thus far, the more evidence that is released, the weaker their case appears, the greater chance for reasonable doubt. The State could turn over damning evidence if they have it, and I question if they have much more, but when since depositions have to be done. Thus far, the State's case is underwhelming imo.

A lot more information will be gleaned from the hearing on the SYG/Self Defense case in the spring. I agree with many that think Judge N is going to kick the can down the road to a jury, she is an elected official. I have to wonder if MOM/West will appeal her decision if their evidence supports the self defense theory as they claim but Judge N rules against them.

Would the trial be postponed?

by Freckles Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:26 pm

Removed by me.

by Freckles Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:32 pm

Removed by me.

by KimmyK Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:39 pm

Found this INTERESTING!!!
Zimmerman: It wasn’t my gun, it wasn’t his gun, it was “THE” gun. What do you think??

Sorry if this was posted already... I wasn't able to keep up for a few.
IMO, GZ's head wounds kind of look like the outline of a gun to me!
Then again, perhaps ONLY those who don't believe GZ's 'story' will see it...JMO

I wish I knew how to post pictures instead of just the links, oh well.

http://dothprotesttoomuch.com/2012/12/06/what-do-you-think/

by Freckles Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:03 pm

Removed by poster.

by Freckles Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:36 pm

Removed by me.

by Freckles Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:56 pm

Removed by me.

by Freckles Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:01 am

Removed by me.

by DebFrmHell Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:15 am

Freckles wrote:
Freckles wrote:For clarity, there is the first released B/W pic taken by cell phone of GZ in back of PD car;
((That was in the first Doc Dump))

There is the vid taken at the PD station
((Initially reported to be no injuries (ABC and Gutman, IIRC) and a week or so later they showed after enhancements that there were indeed injuries))

There is the booking mug shot
((there was no booking mug shot until April 11, 2012 when he was arrested))

There is the later release color pic taken by whom and when?
((Released by SAO only after MOM filed Motions to Compel.))

I see little difference between the first cell phone photo release and the color photo release EXCEPT the added bleeding from the mouth and the clown like nose.

Are we to believe the color photo was taken at the scene? If so, it would explain the blood around the mouth. 1. If this picture was taken at a later time, why would GZ still have the blood on his mouth?

It was taken while GZ was sitting in the back seat of the patrol car. There is a report that has him with his feet out of the door. Look at the angle of the photo. Look to the left of the picture. You can see the onboard computer in the patrol car and the plexiglass screen.

2.If we are to believe the BW photo is a true first rendition, then that COULD explain later swelling?

I honestly do not know of any cell phone that takes B/W photos. If you do, I am willing to research it for you. The photo that is in color is the original. There are programs you an use to change a color picture to B/W or sepia or to whatever you like once you have the original stored in your drive.

Ok. Let's go with that for now. But3. try now to explain the disappearance of the blood which is seen in the LATER color photo.

The EMT's cleaned him up. Look down at his goatee in the B/W, you can see the dried blood. At the station, he requested to use the bathroom and asked for tissues and water during the interviews. Why would he need tissues if the wounds or the nose injury wasn't still weeping? Tim Smith stayed nearby the entire time Zimmerman was there. He is the one who asked GZ if he wanted to go to the hospital after Zimmerman complained of being light-headed while enroute to the station.

If the BW photo is a true first rendition:
No swelling, no blood on mouth.

IF the color photo is a true first rendition:
Swelling apparent, blood on mouth but4. the swelling DISAPPEARS upon arrival at PD station. It is not consistent with later known photos.

I have explained the differences in lighting and equipment. Do you know exactly when those evidence photos were taken at the station? Before interviews? After? In the middle? I don't and I explained why.

And there is the problem with the color photo. The BW photo IS consistent with later photos. It is the color photo that stands out like a green thumb.

BTW, IF the color photo is correct, what with all the blood on the mouth one could reasonably expect the "broken" nose and mouth injuries WOULD have dripped onto GZ's hands, his clothing. Heck, he might even have wiped his nose on his hand or sleeve. 5. And there is a new problem: Lack of evidence of his own blood upon the clothing sufficient to justify supposed injuries.

His blood is on his own clothing.

Deb--
Without sounding condescending, please answer where I have bolded and number above.

I am not trying to be condescending. I have tried to answer your questions regardless. Even the EMTs packing his nose. I told you to ask KZ and related to how it was explained to me when I broke my nose.

I do it to the best of my ability and if you aren't satisfied with it, so be it. I get so frustrated that you ask me things that are in the reports, the same reports you tell me you have read. I have asked several times to please read the reports. I have given links here until I am blue in the fingers. I have even told you that they are dry reading and that they put me to sleep. What else can I do? If you don't care to read all of the officer/EMT reports, I can't make you do it. I have spent more hours than I care to admit going over most of the discovery in the case.

Most of the things you want answers to are related to the FDLE sections in the Discovery. "It is in the reports" is turning into a mantra for me.

Things I don't have the background for/limited knowledge of/no knowledge of I try to research so I can make up my own mind as to what I will accept and what I won't. Like the angle of entry for the bullet wound. What "Direct" means in the autopsy report. What does intermediate range means to an ME. All of these have pages of information with the help of Google.

You can call it biased all you want. I am not offended because I have worked to hard to educate myself. Originally, I did to believe that Zimmerman should have been charged with manslaughter. I don't believe that anymore. And what's more, I think the State is going to have an uphill battle trying to prove it since their bar is Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

Frankly, it is my opinion that if Judge Nelson does not make a ruling favorable to Zimmerman at the Self-Defense Immunity Hearing in April and where the bar is set lower at a Preponderance of Evidence (50.001%), it will go to the 5th DCA before it ever goes to a trial.

by Freckles Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:26 am

George Zimmerman: Prelude to a shooting
April 25, 2012

Clipped--

" EMMANUEL BURGESS - SETTING THE STAGE

On February 2, 2012, Zimmerman placed a call to Sanford police after spotting a young black man he recognized peering into the windows of a neighbor's empty home, according to several friends and neighbors.

"I don't know what he's doing. I don't want to approach him, personally," Zimmerman said in the call, which was recorded. The dispatcher advised him that a patrol car was on the way. By the time police arrived, according to the dispatch report, the suspect had fled.

On February 6, the home of another Twin Lakes resident, Tatiana Demeacis, was burglarized. Two roofers working directly across the street said they saw two African-American men lingering in the yard at the time of the break-in. A new laptop and some gold jewelry were stolen. One of the roofers called police the next day after spotting one of the suspects among a group of male teenagers, three black and one white, on bicycles.

Police found Demeacis's laptop in the backpack of 18-year-old Emmanuel Burgess, police reports show, and charged him with dealing in stolen property. Burgess was the same man Zimmerman had spotted on February 2.

Burgess had committed a series of burglaries on the other side of town in 2008 and 2009, pleaded guilty to several, and spent all of 2010 incarcerated in a juvenile facility, his attorney said. He is now in jail on parole violations."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:36 am

Freckles wrote:
KimmyK wrote:Found this INTERESTING!!!
Zimmerman: It wasn’t my gun, it wasn’t his gun, it was “THE” gun. What do you think??

Sorry if this was posted already... I wasn't able to keep up for a few.
IMO, GZ's head wounds kind of look like the outline of a gun to me!
Then again, perhaps ONLY those who don't believe GZ's 'story' will see it...JMO

I wish I knew how to post pictures instead of just the links, oh well.

http://dothprotesttoomuch.com/2012/12/06/what-do-you-think/
Maybe the magazine but I just don't see the side being used.
How about hitting himself with the flashlight and then tossing the flashlight away, down by the "T" sidewalk intersection?
Certainly does not look like a head being cracked on a sidewalk, IMO.

BTW, we know he was wearing a left sided holster on the right hip.
Which hand did he use to shoot TM?
(He is left hand dominant for penmanship as seen in videos where he is signing his name.)
Did he try a cross pull to shoot TM or did he flip the gun in his right hand?
I ask because I am curious which hand he would have used IF he intentionally inflicted injuries upon himself.

IIRC, GZ is left handed, but I thought I read somewhere he was right hand dominant for shooting(?),
but then in the video he reaches across his body and uses his left, so IDK.
IIRC, there was quite a bit of discussion regarding that in the beginning of how GZ explained the way he grabbed for the gun, or reached out from under Trayvon, that his explanation just didn't seem right.
I would need to go back and view the reinactment video to be sure, and as for the other info, I don't have any links for that, it was a while ago and alot of that old information is really hard to find. I tried to find the pictures of Trayvon's shirt and IIRC, it seemed like the gunshot did not line up right, but I didn't have any luck finding it when I looked for it after the one post where I mentioned that.

IMO, there is too much of GZ's story that just doesn't make sense to me, (head being pounded, being smothered AND screaming just don't add up to me...also, lack of DNA on Trayvon's HANDS if it were true.
LLMPapa points out SEVERAL lies in his videos told by GZ. Blood all over his face and EYES??? There are many more, I just can't think of them at the moment, but too much just don't add up, IMO.
And lastly, IF he was UNDER Trayvon when he shot him, how come Trayvon's blood is not on his shirt???
Too many unanswered questions/things that don't add up with what he's sayin for me to try to believe him, IMO.

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:40 am

Freckles wrote:https://2img.net/h/i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/gunboughtblack1.jpg

Info is redacted.

Who was the registered owner of the gun?
Why revoke Shellie's right to carry but not GZ's ?

Shelly is/was the registered owner of the gun. It was redacted by MOM.
Just seen that info earlier today, will try to find it again.

Found link:
https://2img.net/h/i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/shelliegun1.jpg

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:49 am

DebFrmHell wrote:
Freckles wrote:

Deb--
Without sounding condescending, please answer where I have bolded and number above.

I am not trying to be condescending. I have tried to answer your questions regardless. Even the EMTs packing his nose. I told you to ask KZ and related to how it was explained to me when I broke my nose.

I do it to the best of my ability and if you aren't satisfied with it, so be it. I get so frustrated that you ask me things that are in the reports, the same reports you tell me you have read. I have asked several times to please read the reports. I have given links here until I am blue in the fingers. I have even told you that they are dry reading and that they put me to sleep. What else can I do? If you don't care to read all of the officer/EMT reports, I can't make you do it. I have spent more hours than I care to admit going over most of the discovery in the case.

Most of the things you want answers to are related to the FDLE sections in the Discovery. "It is in the reports" is turning into a mantra for me.

Things I don't have the background for/limited knowledge of/no knowledge of I try to research so I can make up my own mind as to what I will accept and what I won't. Like the angle of entry for the bullet wound. What "Direct" means in the autopsy report. What does intermediate range means to an ME. All of these have pages of information with the help of Google.

You can call it biased all you want. I am not offended because I have worked to hard to educate myself. Originally, I did to believe that Zimmerman should have been charged with manslaughter. I don't believe that anymore. And what's more, I think the State is going to have an uphill battle trying to prove it since their bar is Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

Frankly, it is my opinion that if Judge Nelson does not make a ruling favorable to Zimmerman at the Self-Defense Immunity Hearing in April and where the bar is set lower at a Preponderance of Evidence (50.001%), it will go to the 5th DCA before it ever goes to a trial.

Snipped to add missing quote from above-
At the station, he requested to use the bathroom and asked for tissues and water during the interviews. Why would he need tissues if the wounds or the nose injury wasn't still weeping? Tim Smith stayed nearby the entire time Zimmerman was there.

BBM-
IIRC, GZ went to the bathroom UNATTENDED...
I'm pretty sure I remember reading that as I thought to myself, REALLY???
Please correct me if I am wrong, but if IIRC, he went to the bathroom by himself.
THEN, was also allowed to WASH his hands...

by DebFrmHell Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:01 am

He wasn't under arrest. He did go to the restroom alone as far as I know. Smith made no note of accompanying him. Hopefully he did wash his hands. lol.

I personally think his hand-washing should not by in question. He had already admitted to being the shooter.

by Freckles Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:25 am

Just sharing an interesting commentary:

" If there were two guns, that would explain a lot. That would explain how the gun was both “on the ground” and “in the holster.” It would explain the question. It would suggest another person on site manipulating the crime scene… (white shirt?). We have heard an allusion that someone else touched the body. We have no explanation for how someone gets shot in the heart with a hollow point bullet, moves aside and is still talking. We have no explanation for how the arms go from “running man”, to GZ holding the arms out and searching the hands, to being both under the body. "

http://bcclist.com/2012/07/12/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-2nd-evidence-release/

by Freckles Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:31 am

Removed by poster.

by snowbird Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:07 am

KimmyK wrote:
Freckles wrote:https://2img.net/h/i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/gunboughtblack1.jpg

Info is redacted.

Who was the registered owner of the gun?
Why revoke Shellie's right to carry but not GZ's ?

Shelly is/was the registered owner of the gun. It was redacted by MOM.
Just seen that info earlier today, will try to find it again.

Found link:
https://2img.net/h/i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/shelliegun1.jpg

Thanks, that is the first time I have seen that report. I had always thought it was George gun. Did he really have a license to carry a gun?
Also, I think you can read the reports that have come out on this case and believe he is innocent or guilty. I believe he is guilty and do not believe it happen as he says it happen. That is why I don't post much on this thread, however I believe as you do. Thanks again.

by Calypso Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:56 am

You mean this case hasn't been thrown out yet?

Can't think of her name at the moment, as I've been awol, but the woman who initially brought forth the charges- this was politically motivated on her part.

In the beginning of this case, when the media was posting photos of TM when he was a young teenager rather than recent/current photos of him where he was looking "thug-ish" should have been the first clue.

The second clue should have been when they played the race card.

The reality is, it's unfortunate when ANY young person dies. In this case, TM's chose his lifestyle.

Interesting read: http://www.newblackmusic.net/html/gangstaandthugz.htm

Where were TM's parents and loved ones when TM needed guidance towards a productive adult life?

Back to basics- in order to seek a legal remedy, you have to be without fault.

In other words- if you are killed during the commission of a crime that YOU are committing, who's fault is that vs being an innocent bystander who is killed by someone during a commission of a crime that THEY are committing (as in the CO movie theater).

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:15 am

snowbird wrote:
KimmyK wrote:

Shelly is/was the registered owner of the gun. It was redacted by MOM.
Just seen that info earlier today, will try to find it again.

Found link:
https://2img.net/h/i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/shelliegun1.jpg
Thanks, that is the first time I have seen that report. I had always thought it was George gun. Did he really have a license to carry a gun?
Also, I think you can read the reports that have come out on this case and believe he is innocent or guilty. I believe he is guilty and do not believe it happen as he says it happen. That is why I don't post much on this thread, however I believe as you do. Thanks again.

I have looked for GZ's CCW permit and cannot seem to find one, so that is a GOOD question!
Looks like ShelLIE's permit is being suspended...
Although I thought I read somewhere it was ALREADY revoked, so I'm all confused!

State moves to suspend Shellie Zimmerman's concealed weapons permit
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-09-18/news/os-shellie-zimmerman-gun-permit-20120918_1_shellie-zimmerman-george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin

Oops! I didn't realize this was an OLD article... Cool

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:35 am

Calypso wrote:You mean this case hasn't been thrown out yet?

Can't think of her name at the moment, as I've been awol, but the woman who initially brought forth the charges- this was politically motivated on her part.

In the beginning of this case, when the media was posting photos of TM when he was a young teenager rather than recent/current photos of him where he was looking "thug-ish" should have been the first clue.

The second clue should have been when they played the race card.

The reality is, it's unfortunate when ANY young person dies. In this case, TM's chose his lifestyle.

Interesting read: http://www.newblackmusic.net/html/gangstaandthugz.htm

Where were TM's parents and loved ones when TM needed guidance towards a productive adult life?

Back to basics- in order to seek a legal remedy, you have to be without fault.

In other words- if you are killed during the commission of a crime that YOU are committing, who's fault is that vs being an innocent bystander who is killed by someone during a commission of a crime that THEY are committing (as in the CO movie theater).

BBM-
I doubt this case will be thrown out due to GZ's many 'stories' the evidence doesn't add up with. IMO
Trayvon was not committing a crime before he was shot by GZ.
IMO, probably just defending himself from an overzealous neighborhood watchman.

GZ PROBABLY could have avoided this WHOLE mess had he just said...
"Hi, I'm GZ, NEIGHBORHOOD WATCHMAN, can I ask what you are doing around here???" JMO

If you would like an overview of the info regarding this case, see link:
https://imgur.com/a/bcAII

by Guest Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:48 am

KimmyK wrote:
Calypso wrote:You mean this case hasn't been thrown out yet?

Can't think of her name at the moment, as I've been awol, but the woman who initially brought forth the charges- this was politically motivated on her part.

In the beginning of this case, when the media was posting photos of TM when he was a young teenager rather than recent/current photos of him where he was looking "thug-ish" should have been the first clue.

The second clue should have been when they played the race card.

The reality is, it's unfortunate when ANY young person dies. In this case, TM's chose his lifestyle.

Interesting read: http://www.newblackmusic.net/html/gangstaandthugz.htm

Where were TM's parents and loved ones when TM needed guidance towards a productive adult life?

Back to basics- in order to seek a legal remedy, you have to be without fault.

In other words- if you are killed during the commission of a crime that YOU are committing, who's fault is that vs being an innocent bystander who is killed by someone during a commission of a crime that THEY are committing (as in the CO movie theater).
BBM-
I doubt this case will be thrown out due to GZ's many 'stories' the evidence doesn't add up with. IMO
Trayvon was not committing a crime before he was shot by GZ.
IMO, probably just defending himself from an overzealous neighborhood watchman.

GZ PROBABLY could have avoided this WHOLE mess had he just said...
"Hi, I'm GZ, NEIGHBORHOOD WATCHMAN, can I ask what you are doing around here???" JMO

If you would like an overview of the info regarding this case, see link:
https://imgur.com/a/bcAII

imo, if TM had gone into Brandy's home and NOT doubled back to give GZ a beat down, he too would be aliveand the whole situation avoided. Of course TM had the right to double back for the beat down, imo, he never anticipated GZ had a gun.

So much reasonable doubt.

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:56 am

art tart wrote:
KimmyK wrote:
BBM-
I doubt this case will be thrown out due to GZ's many 'stories' the evidence doesn't add up with. IMO
Trayvon was not committing a crime before he was shot by GZ.
IMO, probably just defending himself from an overzealous neighborhood watchman.

GZ PROBABLY could have avoided this WHOLE mess had he just said...
"Hi, I'm GZ, NEIGHBORHOOD WATCHMAN, can I ask what you are doing around here???" JMO

If you would like an overview of the info regarding this case, see link:
https://imgur.com/a/bcAII

imo, if TM had gone into Brandy's home and NOT doubled back to give GZ a beat down, he too would be aliveand the whole situation avoided.

So much reasonable doubt.

With all due respect Art, you know this HOW?
It is NOT a FACT that Trayvon went BACK for the purpose to give GZ a "beat down."
Besides, IF GZ would have said WHO he was, IMO, GZ would not have ended up facing murder 2. JMO

by Alessandra_Deux Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:19 pm

Calypso wrote:You mean this case hasn't been thrown out yet?

Can't think of her name at the moment, as I've been awol, but the woman who initially brought forth the charges- this was politically motivated on her part.

In the beginning of this case, when the media was posting photos of TM when he was a young teenager rather than recent/current photos of him where he was looking "thug-ish" should have been the first clue.

The second clue should have been when they played the race card.

The reality is, it's unfortunate when ANY young person dies. In this case, TM's chose his lifestyle.

Interesting read: http://www.newblackmusic.net/html/gangstaandthugz.htm

Where were TM's parents and loved ones when TM needed guidance towards a productive adult life?

Back to basics- in order to seek a legal remedy, you have to be without fault.

In other words- if you are killed during the commission of a crime that YOU are committing, who's fault is that vs being an innocent bystander who is killed by someone during a commission of a crime that THEY are committing (as in the CO movie theater).

Trayvon Martin didn't have a criminal record or a history of violence. Zimmerman does.

Trayvon was not engaging in an unlawful or illegal activity, he was not in the middle of committing a felony when he was "profiled as a criminal" by Zimmerman, he was simply walking back to the house where he was staying after he had made a purchase at a 7-Eleven.

Zimmerman wrongly and erroneously perceived Trayvon as a "criminal" because there were numerous burglaries in the gated community which were perpetrated by young black males ("that looked like Trayvon Martin") prior to the time he saw Trayvon "leisurely walking in the rain".

I totally failed to understand the implications of the link that you posted.

by Lash Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:30 pm

In my opinion, GZ should have stayed in his car. GZ did not commit a crime by leaving his vehicle.

In my opinion, TM should have went straight home if he thought he was being followed. Maybe even hung up with his girlfriend, called an adult or 911. Either way, TM was not committing a crime.

I know this is not going to be a popular opinion. I believe what happened prior to the altercation should not be part of the equation because neither TM or GZ were committing a crime.

Even fighting words are not a crime, unless they happen to be threats to ones life. A crime was not committed until someone was pushed, shoved or punched. This is the point where self defense enters the equation and unfortunately a young man lost his life.

by Alessandra_Deux Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:36 pm

KimmyK wrote:
art tart wrote:

imo, if TM had gone into Brandy's home and NOT doubled back to give GZ a beat down, he too would be aliveand the whole situation avoided.

So much reasonable doubt.

With all due respect Art, you know this HOW?
It is NOT a FACT that Trayvon went BACK for the purpose to give GZ a "beat down."
Besides, IF GZ would have said WHO he was, IMO, GZ would not have ended up facing murder 2. JMO

KimmyK,

According to a police map cross referencing the witnesses' statements with the crime scene evidence (the items that were collected at the scene of the crime), Zimmerman encountered Trayvon further south to where his body was found face down in the grass. The map shows that all the items were found south of Trayvon's body.

Zimmerman have alleged that he was attacked by Trayvon right by the "T", the evidence proves otherwise.

You can see the map here:

https://youtu.be/lGmwMa-VhRg

We already know that Trayvon's body was found at least 35 yards from where Zimmerman claims the altercation took place (reenactment video).

by Alessandra_Deux Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:57 pm

KimmyK wrote:
Freckles wrote:https://2img.net/h/i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/gunboughtblack1.jpg

Info is redacted.

Who was the registered owner of the gun?
Why revoke Shellie's right to carry but not GZ's ?

Shelly is/was the registered owner of the gun. It was redacted by MOM.
Just seen that info earlier today, will try to find it again.

Found link:
https://2img.net/h/i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/shelliegun1.jpg

Interesting.......quite interesting indeed.

Thank you for posting the link.

by Lash Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:35 pm

George Zimmerman: Prelude to a shooting

By Chris Francescani | Wed Apr 25, 2012

(Reuters) - A pit bull named Big Boi began menacing George and Shellie Zimmerman in the fall of 2009.

The first time the dog ran free and cornered Shellie in their gated community in Sanford, Florida, George called the owner to complain. The second time, Big Boi frightened his mother-in-law's dog. Zimmerman called Seminole County Animal Services and bought pepper spray. The third time he saw the dog on the loose, he called again. An officer came to the house, county records show.

"Don't use pepper spray," he told the Zimmermans, according to a friend. "It'll take two or three seconds to take effect, but a quarter second for the dog to jump you," he said.

"Get a gun."

That November, the Zimmermans completed firearms training at a local lodge and received concealed-weapons gun permits. In early December, another source close to them told Reuters, the couple bought a pair of guns. George picked a Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm handgun, a popular, lightweight weapon.

Long article - more at link -
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:58 pm

Alessandra_Deux wrote:
KimmyK wrote:

With all due respect Art, you know this HOW?
It is NOT a FACT that Trayvon went BACK for the purpose to give GZ a "beat down."
Besides, IF GZ would have said WHO he was, IMO, GZ would not have ended up facing murder 2. JMO

KimmyK,

According to a police map cross referencing the witnesses' statements with the crime scene evidence (the items that were collected at the scene of the crime), Zimmerman encountered Trayvon further south to where his body was found face down in the grass. The map shows that all the items were found south of Trayvon's body.

Zimmerman have alleged that he was attacked by Trayvon right by the "T", the evidence proves otherwise.

You can see the map here:

https://youtu.be/lGmwMa-VhRg

We already know that Trayvon's body was found at least 35 yards from where Zimmerman claims the altercation took place (reenactment video).

Interesting as well, (sorry don't remember where I read it, been bouncing all over lately), but it was mentioned that Trayvon may have made it back to the house and banged on the patio door, but Chad was playing video games and had headphones on, so he wouldn't hear Travon knock if he possibly did that.
I will try and find link later...
It was stated that Trayvon didn't have a key, so he would have had to be let in the house by Chad.
Also a text from Trayvon to Chad that he was on his way back from 7-11, but IDK if that is true or not.

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:21 pm

You have to see this cartoon reenactment!
I guess it's been around for a while, but if you need a laugh...

George Zimmerman Reenactment Of Trayvon Martin Shooting (Animated version)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIf5JiJextE&feature=youtu.be

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:38 pm

A Christmas Message from Robert Zimmerman Sr (To CTH?)
Also, Jr putting his two cents in...
Article sums it up quite well too, IMO
Snipped-
If you’ll notice, both dad and Robert Jr have thanked them for their tireless work, research, and support. (They forgot to mention donations, but receiving donations from the racist Conservative Treehouse is supposed to be kept hush hush).

Ironically, during the past few weeks, the GZLegalCase website and the Robert Zimmerman Jr twitter account can be seen trying to act as if they don’t condone this type of behavior – asking supporters to refrain from using language that displays racism and hate. They’ve asked them to keep quiet, because you know, Jr. is in the middle of a “My Family Isn’t Racist Tour”. So while Jr. is busy screaming “we’re not racists”, the TreePeople are screaming “well we are, and we love you George!”

Don't want to start any discussion on the matter, just posted for info purposes only...
Scroll down at link...
http://dothprotesttoomuch.com/2012/12/28/racists-racists-read-all-about-it-cth-word-of-the-day-blacktards/

by Lash Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:58 pm

KimmyK wrote:A Christmas Message from Robert Zimmerman Sr (To CTH?)
Also, Jr putting his two cents in...
Article sums it up quite well too, IMO
Snipped-
If you’ll notice, both dad and Robert Jr have thanked them for their tireless work, research, and support. (They forgot to mention donations, but receiving donations from the racist Conservative Treehouse is supposed to be kept hush hush).

Ironically, during the past few weeks, the GZLegalCase website and the Robert Zimmerman Jr twitter account can be seen trying to act as if they don’t condone this type of behavior – asking supporters to refrain from using language that displays racism and hate. They’ve asked them to keep quiet, because you know, Jr. is in the middle of a “My Family Isn’t Racist Tour”. So while Jr. is busy screaming “we’re not racists”, the TreePeople are screaming “well we are, and we love you George!”

Don't want to start any discussion on the matter, just posted for info purposes only...
Scroll down at link...
http://dothprotesttoomuch.com/2012/12/28/racists-racists-read-all-about-it-cth-word-of-the-day-blacktards/

Snip from above article -

The reality is that your supporters and your brother’s supporters are these type of people, and these type of people only. You are not backed by normal, kind, loving and patriotic people. You are supported by the most UN-American, racist people there are. You are supported by people that reflect YOUR family.

MHO - Judgmental name calling is hate. Way to go Trayvonstruth! Respond to hate by spewing hate? Sad, real sad. It is people like this that teach our world how to hate.

by Freckles Sun Dec 30, 2012 3:28 pm

Removed by poster.

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:08 pm

Lash wrote:
KimmyK wrote:A Christmas Message from Robert Zimmerman Sr (To CTH?)
Also, Jr putting his two cents in...
Article sums it up quite well too, IMO
Snipped-
If you’ll notice, both dad and Robert Jr have thanked them for their tireless work, research, and support. (They forgot to mention donations, but receiving donations from the racist Conservative Treehouse is supposed to be kept hush hush).

Ironically, during the past few weeks, the GZLegalCase website and the Robert Zimmerman Jr twitter account can be seen trying to act as if they don’t condone this type of behavior – asking supporters to refrain from using language that displays racism and hate. They’ve asked them to keep quiet, because you know, Jr. is in the middle of a “My Family Isn’t Racist Tour”. So while Jr. is busy screaming “we’re not racists”, the TreePeople are screaming “well we are, and we love you George!”

Don't want to start any discussion on the matter, just posted for info purposes only...
Scroll down at link...
http://dothprotesttoomuch.com/2012/12/28/racists-racists-read-all-about-it-cth-word-of-the-day-blacktards/

Snip from above article -

The reality is that your supporters and your brother’s supporters are these type of people, and these type of people only. You are not backed by normal, kind, loving and patriotic people. You are supported by the most UN-American, racist people there are. You are supported by people that reflect YOUR family.

MHO - Judgmental name calling is hate. Way to go Trayvonstruth! Respond to hate by spewing hate? Sad, real sad. It is people like this that teach our world how to hate.

BBM-
Good catch Freckles! I missed that and you called it...it is too bad, although if the tables were turned,
I honestly believe there would have been an arrest THAT night, which is also very sad, but JMO.

by KZ Sun Dec 30, 2012 5:35 pm

(Sorry in advance for the very long post. Feel free to scroll past if you like! I’m gonna rant a bit-- a few thousand words.)

I’ve done a lot of reading and thinking about the concept of “malice” that is necessary to prove 2nd degree murder. I first became intrigued with the concept of malice as it applies to doctors (and other health care professionals) who are so breathtakingly negligent that they cause the death of another human being in the course of caring for them professionally. At a certain point, it sure seems to me that highly reckless departure from professional standards meets the criteria for knowing that one’s conduct “could” cause death—which is part of the concept of malice necessary to prove 2nd degree murder. One example of such egregious incompetence was that of Dr. Roberto Bonilla in California (google him), and another was Conrad Murray (Michael Jackson’s doctor). I still feel that their conduct rose to such an egregious level, with an awareness of this recklessness, that both should have been charged with second degree murder—but both were “only” charged with involuntary manslaughter (and convicted). The “involuntary” part is what set me on a quest to try to understand what is going on in the minds of prosecutors, the law, and the political environment in which doctors practice. The interesting component about the “involuntary” issue for physicians is that as long as they say they “believe” their conduct was not reckless, they are presumed to no hold any malice, and therefore 2nd degree charges aren’t pursued.

I had long been puzzled “why” doctors appear to be “immune” to second degree murder charges—their MD provides a golden parachute that is seldom challenged by prosecutors, no matter how egregious their conduct in caring for patients. For example, a drunk doctor driving into the hospital who kills someone can be charged with 2nd degree murder, but that same drunk doctor wielding a scalpel in the OR who injures or kill a patient can, at most, be charged with involuntary manslaughter. Prosecutors will almost never risk bringing 2nd degree murder charges against a doctor for actions in the course of their professional care. MALICE is the issue. It is a hugely complex area of law, and separates manslaughter from murder. A doctor, in the course of his/ her work, is NEVER presumed to be functioning from a place of “malice”, and therefore can almost never be charged with second degree murder. In essence, a doctor (even an impaired one) is presumed to be functioning from a position of “helping”, which is antithetical to malice. So when an impaired doctor kills someone, the charges are typically civil negligence, or if the situation is so immensely extreme (like Bonilla’s and Murray’s), the most we usually see is involuntary manslaughter—and even that is rare.

For the average person, we are held to a different standard in our conduct in society. We are charged with making determinations about whether our conduct “could” reasonably cause another person’s death—such as driving our cars drunk, or brandishing a weapon, or firing a “warning” shot at our abusive husbands (Marissa Alexander, prosecuted by Angela Corey). That is just beginning to scratch the surface about what the law sees as “malice”, which is essential in 2nd degree charges. Important to state here that “malice” is a WHOLE LOT different than just garden variety stupidity, or just making dumb decisions. This is where GZ comes in, imo. And I really hope MOM does a good job in court (if it gets to court) explaining malice to the jurors. An understanding of malice is essential for determining if he is guilty of 2nd degree murder. I happen to think GZ’s actions do NOT rise to the level of malice needed to prove 2nd degree murder, and I have become more reluctant to even view his actions as manslaughter. I’d like to explain my thinking a little.

I generally think he is a complete idiot. I think he made several stupid decisions. I think he SHOULD have announced who he was—but even though he didn’t, that ISN’T malice. I think he SHOULD have stayed in his truck—but he got out and followed TM. I think that was monumentally stupid, but not “malice”. Why do I think it wasn’t malice? Because he CALLED POLICE before he did either one. Any resident is free to call police at any time—even if it is a stupid call, a nuisance call,-- EVEN if it IS a racist making the call, etc. Mentally ill people can call police, children, criminals—ANYONE. The mere fact that GZ made a NEN call to police to report TM as suspicious is NOT a malicious act. The fact that he called police NEN REMOVES the implication of malice (for me, anyway) in the “first” meeting of GZ and TM, imo. He did not assault verbally or physically, or otherwise attack TM in the first meeting—and DID call police, therefore no malice there. He acted stupidly by his actions, but nothing he did was against the law at that point. He was LEGALLY carrying his concealed weapon, and there is NO EVIDENCE he brandished it, or otherwise did anything illegal with the gun. Maybe some think he was stupid to be packing a concealed weapon on his way to Target, but guess what? A lot of people in society of varying levels of intelligence AND stupidity have legally issued CCW permits.

Now the second meeting is where the whole thing gets interesting for me. Every single bit of evidence we have says to me that TM “got away” from this creepy strange man. GZ himself says he lost sight of him in his remarks to the dispatcher. So now we have a “new” situation separate from the first encounter, imo. Up till this point, there was a teen walking in the neighborhood of his father’s GF to her apartment, and a creepy neighborhood watch guy hyper vigilant for any person who appeared out of place or suspicious. (That is not unreasonable, given the level of recent crime in this apartment complex.) GZ did what he was supposed to do as a NW person—he called police, BUT—he got out of his car to follow. Does follow equal pursuit? I don’t think it necessarily does in this situation, but it could in other “chase” situations. And if it was pursuit, does pursuit equal malice? I don’t think it does, in this situation. There is no indication and no evidence he was chasing down TM with his gun drawn. He was trying to keep him in sight, knowing police were on the way. That STILL isn’t malice, imo.

In the course of that second situation, the evidence persuades me that TM did “get away”, and made the decision to double back and preemptively assault GZ—either to teach the creepy guy a lesson, or for some other reason. What is apparent is that GZ was NOT assaulting TM at the point that TM chose to assault GZ. What TM also did NOT do is express fear or concern such as telling Dee Dee to call 911. TM chose to assault FIRST (IMO), in this second encounter, from all that the EVIDENCE points to, including eye witnesses. That is very clearly a crime.

The gunshot was at point blank range with TM witnessed on top of GZ hitting him. Once that detail came out, the case for 2nd degree murder, imo, was severely weakened. He didn’t “gun down” a defenseless, running, unarmed kid—this was hand to hand combat, initiated by TM, and GZ was the one being physically assaulted. There is no way anyone can convince me that the one on top doing the punching was the one wailing for help—that is purely my opinion. I think GZ was scared and crying for help—and he KNEW he had called police and they were coming. He was terrified of this person (who now had confirmed his suspicions to him that he was up to no good by attacking him and beating him up), and shot him from a place of fear. Fear of further injury and fear of his life. For pete’s sake—the attacker was on top of him. He wasn’t required to lay there and be beaten into unconsciousness and/ or death to be justified in defending himself. It is tremendously sad and unfortunate that this 17 year old teen chose to hit first—another stupid decision—but I am convinced by GZ’s actions before, during, and after, that he didn’t have “malice” in his heart when he shot TM, but FEAR. I don’t believe TM was in a position to legally justify his preemptive assault against GZ—he GOT AWAY from him, and chose to come back to assault. I am convinced that TM was expressing ANGER—perhaps borne of fear, or borne of bravado—who knows. I am equally convinced that TM would be alive if he had not assaulted GZ first. GZ made several stupid decisions, but so did TM. When 2 nervous, stupid people meet, one assaults the other, and one has a gun, something like this can happen. That is not “blaming” the victim—it’s the reality of the situation. TM, just as GZ, DOES bear some responsibility for his actions, imo. He CHOSE to get physical with GZ. That choice cost him his life. GZ could just as easily have been killed if TM had been carrying a gun. He is now embroiled in the fall out from shooting this teen—and regardless of what happens in court, he will be surrounded by the implications of that for the rest of his life. He will be lucky to not be gunned down himself by an angry mob if he is ever free in society again. He will be lucky to ever have a job again, etc. His life will suck for a long, long time, EVEN if he is not put in prison by a jury.

GZ didn’t “run” after he shot TM—he has cooperated at every step. Yes, he lied about the $$ in the donation account—he and Shellie are none too bright. They will face consequences for those lies. But that lie doesn’t equal malice either. Yes, he and his family are thoroughly unlikable—but that isn’t malice either.

Yes, maybe his injuries were not as “severe” as many would like them to be to justify his shooting TM, but he WAS injured prior to the shooting (his head and face no less)—and TM was not. It’s ludicrous, imo, to even suggest that GZ somehow quickly sized up the situation and self inflicted his injuries to get himself “out of trouble”—laughable, in light of how many times he called for help. He is just not bright enough to mastermind a big plan to gun down a defenseless “kid”. And he’s not a hulking racist polishing his gun and starching his pointed hat. He’s a dumb$h!# with a gun. It's just that simple. And TM was a not-so-bright teen with a lot of (ahem) “difficulties” in his background shaping HIS response to the situation. He wasn’t a little kid. He would have been charged as an adult if he committed crimes, so making him out to be a sweet 12 year old in a football jersey is just NOT who this teen was, imo. He was a kid clearly headed down the wrong path, in a lot of trouble at school, dabbling in illegal drugs and burglary and graffiti, posturing with a gangster persona (like a lot of other kids, yes), with largely ineffective/ absent parental supervision and guidance. I sincerely doubt that he was on track to graduate on time, with all of his school behavior problems. That is all my opinion—and doesn’t mean I’m “bashing” the victim—it simply EXPLAINS how he came to be in the situation he was in with GZ at that apartment complex hours from his home in the dark and rain, alone, unsupervised, and why he behaved the way he did. For pete’s sake—his own FATHER didn’t even worry that he didn’t come home all night, and didn’t even know where he was, or try to find him till the next day. That is a pattern of parenting behavior, imo. And some people think this is perfectly okay? But we can’t criticize that, because they are grieving parents?? This was a tragedy that could be repeated in every city in this country any day of the week, but for the actions of the “handlers” and the media mangling and manipulating the story into a racist encounter, and a malicious (imo) prosecutor appointed to quell the impending riots. There are thousands, maybe millions of GZ’s and TM’s who could come into a chance encounter like this, with tragic outcome. It never was the “racist” situation it was presented to be in the media, imo, and the campaign of the Handlers and the parents manipulated the whole situation into a fraudulent social frenzy, cloaked in victimhood. TM’s parents are grieving the loss of this teen, but the reality is that his own behavior, background, and upbringing DID contribute to his death in this situation. And that has got to be incredibly painful for his parents to face, if they ever will. GZ will live with the consequences of HIS actions every day for the rest of his life. A bunch of transparently evil racists put a PUBLIC bounty on his head, and faced NO consequences for doing so—and many prominent people and media organizations advanced utter and outright lies to figuratively “lynch” GZ in the court of public opinion--that should bother and disgust every citizen to the core of their soul. And while GZ’s life is ruined, I don’t still don’t think he committed any kind of murder, and I’m not persuaded that what he did was manslaughter. The whole thing is just a tremendous tragedy, imo. And neither GZ nor TM are innocent, pure, and blameless, imo.

(Rant complete.)

by Freckles Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:19 pm

Removed by poster.

by Freckles Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:21 pm

Removed by poster.

by Alessandra_Deux Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:26 pm

KimmyK wrote:You have to see this cartoon reenactment!
I guess it's been around for a while, but if you need a laugh...

George Zimmerman Reenactment Of Trayvon Martin Shooting (Animated version)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIf5JiJextE&feature=youtu.be

This cartoon would be really funny if this case wasn't so tragic, if George wasn't such a pathological liar and a 17 years old boy wasn't dead.

From the above link:

Raw Video: George Zimmerman reenacts incident for Sanford Police

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

Walter Scott

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:41 pm

Alessandra_Deux wrote:
KimmyK wrote:You have to see this cartoon reenactment!
I guess it's been around for a while, but if you need a laugh...

George Zimmerman Reenactment Of Trayvon Martin Shooting (Animated version)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIf5JiJextE&feature=youtu.be

This cartoon would be really funny if this case wasn't so tragic, if George wasn't such a pathological liar and a 17 years old boy wasn't dead.

From the above link:

Raw Video: George Zimmerman reenacts incident for Sanford Police

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!"

Walter Scott

How true, I thought about that after I posted it.....
It did, IMO, partly show just how unbelievable GZ's 'story' is...IMO!
I just hope and pray the truth comes out and justice prevails.

The really sad part is, that this case is just the 'tip of the iceberg' of a MUCH BIGGER problem in America.
As, IMO I think many people would be on the 'other side of the street' if the roles were reversed.
Then again, JMO

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:57 pm

KZ wrote:(Sorry in advance for the very long post. Feel free to scroll past if you like! I’m gonna rant a bit-- a few thousand words.)

I’ve done a lot of reading and thinking about the concept of “malice” that is necessary to prove 2nd degree murder. I first became intrigued with the concept of malice as it applies to doctors (and other health care professionals) who are so breathtakingly negligent that they cause the death of another human being in the course of caring for them professionally. At a certain point, it sure seems to me that highly reckless departure from professional standards meets the criteria for knowing that one’s conduct “could” cause death—which is part of the concept of malice necessary to prove 2nd degree murder. One example of such egregious incompetence was that of Dr. Roberto Bonilla in California (google him), and another was Conrad Murray (Michael Jackson’s doctor). I still feel that their conduct rose to such an egregious level, with an awareness of this recklessness, that both should have been charged with second degree murder—but both were “only” charged with involuntary manslaughter (and convicted). The “involuntary” part is what set me on a quest to try to understand what is going on in the minds of prosecutors, the law, and the political environment in which doctors practice. The interesting component about the “involuntary” issue for physicians is that as long as they say they “believe” their conduct was not reckless, they are presumed to no hold any malice, and therefore 2nd degree charges aren’t pursued.

I had long been puzzled “why” doctors appear to be “immune” to second degree murder charges—their MD provides a golden parachute that is seldom challenged by prosecutors, no matter how egregious their conduct in caring for patients. For example, a drunk doctor driving into the hospital who kills someone can be charged with 2nd degree murder, but that same drunk doctor wielding a scalpel in the OR who injures or kill a patient can, at most, be charged with involuntary manslaughter. Prosecutors will almost never risk bringing 2nd degree murder charges against a doctor for actions in the course of their professional care. MALICE is the issue. It is a hugely complex area of law, and separates manslaughter from murder. A doctor, in the course of his/ her work, is NEVER presumed to be functioning from a place of “malice”, and therefore can almost never be charged with second degree murder. In essence, a doctor (even an impaired one) is presumed to be functioning from a position of “helping”, which is antithetical to malice. So when an impaired doctor kills someone, the charges are typically civil negligence, or if the situation is so immensely extreme (like Bonilla’s and Murray’s), the most we usually see is involuntary manslaughter—and even that is rare.

For the average person, we are held to a different standard in our conduct in society. We are charged with making determinations about whether our conduct “could” reasonably cause another person’s death—such as driving our cars drunk, or brandishing a weapon, or firing a “warning” shot at our abusive husbands (Marissa Alexander, prosecuted by Angela Corey). That is just beginning to scratch the surface about what the law sees as “malice”, which is essential in 2nd degree charges. Important to state here that “malice” is a WHOLE LOT different than just garden variety stupidity, or just making dumb decisions. This is where GZ comes in, imo. And I really hope MOM does a good job in court (if it gets to court) explaining malice to the jurors. An understanding of malice is essential for determining if he is guilty of 2nd degree murder. I happen to think GZ’s actions do NOT rise to the level of malice needed to prove 2nd degree murder, and I have become more reluctant to even view his actions as manslaughter. I’d like to explain my thinking a little.

I generally think he is a complete idiot. I think he made several stupid decisions. I think he SHOULD have announced who he was—but even though he didn’t, that ISN’T malice. I think he SHOULD have stayed in his truck—but he got out and followed TM. I think that was monumentally stupid, but not “malice”. Why do I think it wasn’t malice? Because he CALLED POLICE before he did either one. Any resident is free to call police at any time—even if it is a stupid call, a nuisance call,-- EVEN if it IS a racist making the call, etc. Mentally ill people can call police, children, criminals—ANYONE. The mere fact that GZ made a NEN call to police to report TM as suspicious is NOT a malicious act. The fact that he called police NEN REMOVES the implication of malice (for me, anyway) in the “first” meeting of GZ and TM, imo. He did not assault verbally or physically, or otherwise attack TM in the first meeting—and DID call police, therefore no malice there. He acted stupidly by his actions, but nothing he did was against the law at that point. He was LEGALLY carrying his concealed weapon, and there is NO EVIDENCE he brandished it, or otherwise did anything illegal with the gun. Maybe some think he was stupid to be packing a concealed weapon on his way to Target, but guess what? A lot of people in society of varying levels of intelligence AND stupidity have legally issued CCW permits.

Now the second meeting is where the whole thing gets interesting for me. Every single bit of evidence we have says to me that TM “got away” from this creepy strange man. GZ himself says he lost sight of him in his remarks to the dispatcher. So now we have a “new” situation separate from the first encounter, imo. Up till this point, there was a teen walking in the neighborhood of his father’s GF to her apartment, and a creepy neighborhood watch guy hyper vigilant for any person who appeared out of place or suspicious. (That is not unreasonable, given the level of recent crime in this apartment complex.) GZ did what he was supposed to do as a NW person—he called police, BUT—he got out of his car to follow. Does follow equal pursuit? I don’t think it necessarily does in this situation, but it could in other “chase” situations. And if it was pursuit, does pursuit equal malice? I don’t think it does, in this situation. There is no indication and no evidence he was chasing down TM with his gun drawn. He was trying to keep him in sight, knowing police were on the way. That STILL isn’t malice, imo.

In the course of that second situation, the evidence persuades me that TM did “get away”, and made the decision to double back and preemptively assault GZ—either to teach the creepy guy a lesson, or for some other reason. What is apparent is that GZ was NOT assaulting TM at the point that TM chose to assault GZ. What TM also did NOT do is express fear or concern such as telling Dee Dee to call 911. TM chose to assault FIRST (IMO), in this second encounter, from all that the EVIDENCE points to, including eye witnesses. That is very clearly a crime.

The gunshot was at point blank range with TM witnessed on top of GZ hitting him. Once that detail came out, the case for 2nd degree murder, imo, was severely weakened. He didn’t “gun down” a defenseless, running, unarmed kid—this was hand to hand combat, initiated by TM, and GZ was the one being physically assaulted. There is no way anyone can convince me that the one on top doing the punching was the one wailing for help—that is purely my opinion. I think GZ was scared and crying for help—and he KNEW he had called police and they were coming. He was terrified of this person (who now had confirmed his suspicions to him that he was up to no good by attacking him and beating him up), and shot him from a place of fear. Fear of further injury and fear of his life. For pete’s sake—the attacker was on top of him. He wasn’t required to lay there and be beaten into unconsciousness and/ or death to be justified in defending himself. It is tremendously sad and unfortunate that this 17 year old teen chose to hit first—another stupid decision—but I am convinced by GZ’s actions before, during, and after, that he didn’t have “malice” in his heart when he shot TM, but FEAR. I don’t believe TM was in a position to legally justify his preemptive assault against GZ—he GOT AWAY from him, and chose to come back to assault. I am convinced that TM was expressing ANGER—perhaps borne of fear, or borne of bravado—who knows. I am equally convinced that TM would be alive if he had not assaulted GZ first. GZ made several stupid decisions, but so did TM. When 2 nervous, stupid people meet, one assaults the other, and one has a gun, something like this can happen. That is not “blaming” the victim—it’s the reality of the situation. TM, just as GZ, DOES bear some responsibility for his actions, imo. He CHOSE to get physical with GZ. That choice cost him his life. GZ could just as easily have been killed if TM had been carrying a gun. He is now embroiled in the fall out from shooting this teen—and regardless of what happens in court, he will be surrounded by the implications of that for the rest of his life. He will be lucky to not be gunned down himself by an angry mob if he is ever free in society again. He will be lucky to ever have a job again, etc. His life will suck for a long, long time, EVEN if he is not put in prison by a jury.

GZ didn’t “run” after he shot TM—he has cooperated at every step. Yes, he lied about the $$ in the donation account—he and Shellie are none too bright. They will face consequences for those lies. But that lie doesn’t equal malice either. Yes, he and his family are thoroughly unlikable—but that isn’t malice either.

Yes, maybe his injuries were not as “severe” as many would like them to be to justify his shooting TM, but he WAS injured prior to the shooting (his head and face no less)—and TM was not. It’s ludicrous, imo, to even suggest that GZ somehow quickly sized up the situation and self inflicted his injuries to get himself “out of trouble”—laughable, in light of how many times he called for help. He is just not bright enough to mastermind a big plan to gun down a defenseless “kid”. And he’s not a hulking racist polishing his gun and starching his pointed hat. He’s a dumb$h!# with a gun. It's just that simple. And TM was a not-so-bright teen with a lot of (ahem) “difficulties” in his background shaping HIS response to the situation. He wasn’t a little kid. He would have been charged as an adult if he committed crimes, so making him out to be a sweet 12 year old in a football jersey is just NOT who this teen was, imo. He was a kid clearly headed down the wrong path, in a lot of trouble at school, dabbling in illegal drugs and burglary and graffiti, posturing with a gangster persona (like a lot of other kids, yes), with largely ineffective/ absent parental supervision and guidance. I sincerely doubt that he was on track to graduate on time, with all of his school behavior problems. That is all my opinion—and doesn’t mean I’m “bashing” the victim—it simply EXPLAINS how he came to be in the situation he was in with GZ at that apartment complex hours from his home in the dark and rain, alone, unsupervised, and why he behaved the way he did. For pete’s sake—his own FATHER didn’t even worry that he didn’t come home all night, and didn’t even know where he was, or try to find him till the next day. That is a pattern of parenting behavior, imo. And some people think this is perfectly okay? But we can’t criticize that, because they are grieving parents?? This was a tragedy that could be repeated in every city in this country any day of the week, but for the actions of the “handlers” and the media mangling and manipulating the story into a racist encounter, and a malicious (imo) prosecutor appointed to quell the impending riots. There are thousands, maybe millions of GZ’s and TM’s who could come into a chance encounter like this, with tragic outcome. It never was the “racist” situation it was presented to be in the media, imo, and the campaign of the Handlers and the parents manipulated the whole situation into a fraudulent social frenzy, cloaked in victimhood. TM’s parents are grieving the loss of this teen, but the reality is that his own behavior, background, and upbringing DID contribute to his death in this situation. And that has got to be incredibly painful for his parents to face, if they ever will. GZ will live with the consequences of HIS actions every day for the rest of his life. A bunch of transparently evil racists put a PUBLIC bounty on his head, and faced NO consequences for doing so—and many prominent people and media organizations advanced utter and outright lies to figuratively “lynch” GZ in the court of public opinion--that should bother and disgust every citizen to the core of their soul. And while GZ’s life is ruined, I don’t still don’t think he committed any kind of murder, and I’m not persuaded that what he did was manslaughter. The whole thing is just a tremendous tragedy, imo. And neither GZ nor TM are innocent, pure, and blameless, imo.

(Rant complete.)

BBM-Respectfuylly snipped,
TM, just as GZ, DOES bear some responsibility for his actions, imo.
Probably true, but you are comparing the actions of a 17 year old adolescent with a 28 year old man.
A 28 year old ex-bouncer with a history of violence. Ok, stupid 28 year old nonetheless, but still.
Big difference, IMO...
My oldest at 21 is nowhere near who she was at 17, who did some experimenting...
Alot of that is due to peer pressure, I think a good many older teens/adolescents do alot of things we as parents would just cringe about, but it is part of growing up in today's society, partly them trying to be an adult and making their OWN decisions. She was raised in church and we censored what she read and what she watched until she was much older, she complained, well so-on-so's parents let them...yada, yada, yada, and unfortunately we still couldn't control what she did every minute, as much as we like to think, JMO

by Alessandra_Deux Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:29 pm

To call Zimmerman's actions "stupid" is an attempt to minimize the grave consequences of the decision that he made when he determined that Trayvon was not going to get away.

I won't call Zimmerman's actions "stupid", I would call them criminal.

by Guest Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:13 pm

KZ wrote:(Sorry in advance for the very long post. Feel free to scroll past if you like! I’m gonna rant a bit-- a few thousand words.)

I’ve done a lot of reading and thinking about the concept of “malice” that is necessary to prove 2nd degree murder. I first became intrigued with the concept of malice as it applies to doctors (and other health care professionals) who are so breathtakingly negligent that they cause the death of another human being in the course of caring for them professionally. At a certain point, it sure seems to me that highly reckless departure from professional standards meets the criteria for knowing that one’s conduct “could” cause death—which is part of the concept of malice necessary to prove 2nd degree murder. One example of such egregious incompetence was that of Dr. Roberto Bonilla in California (google him), and another was Conrad Murray (Michael Jackson’s doctor). I still feel that their conduct rose to such an egregious level, with an awareness of this recklessness, that both should have been charged with second degree murder—but both were “only” charged with involuntary manslaughter (and convicted). The “involuntary” part is what set me on a quest to try to understand what is going on in the minds of prosecutors, the law, and the political environment in which doctors practice. The interesting component about the “involuntary” issue for physicians is that as long as they say they “believe” their conduct was not reckless, they are presumed to no hold any malice, and therefore 2nd degree charges aren’t pursued.

I had long been puzzled “why” doctors appear to be “immune” to second degree murder charges—their MD provides a golden parachute that is seldom challenged by prosecutors, no matter how egregious their conduct in caring for patients. For example, a drunk doctor driving into the hospital who kills someone can be charged with 2nd degree murder, but that same drunk doctor wielding a scalpel in the OR who injures or kill a patient can, at most, be charged with involuntary manslaughter. Prosecutors will almost never risk bringing 2nd degree murder charges against a doctor for actions in the course of their professional care. MALICE is the issue. It is a hugely complex area of law, and separates manslaughter from murder. A doctor, in the course of his/ her work, is NEVER presumed to be functioning from a place of “malice”, and therefore can almost never be charged with second degree murder. In essence, a doctor (even an impaired one) is presumed to be functioning from a position of “helping”, which is antithetical to malice. So when an impaired doctor kills someone, the charges are typically civil negligence, or if the situation is so immensely extreme (like Bonilla’s and Murray’s), the most we usually see is involuntary manslaughter—and even that is rare.

For the average person, we are held to a different standard in our conduct in society. We are charged with making determinations about whether our conduct “could” reasonably cause another person’s death—such as driving our cars drunk, or brandishing a weapon, or firing a “warning” shot at our abusive husbands (Marissa Alexander, prosecuted by Angela Corey). That is just beginning to scratch the surface about what the law sees as “malice”, which is essential in 2nd degree charges. Important to state here that “malice” is a WHOLE LOT different than just garden variety stupidity, or just making dumb decisions. This is where GZ comes in, imo. And I really hope MOM does a good job in court (if it gets to court) explaining malice to the jurors. An understanding of malice is essential for determining if he is guilty of 2nd degree murder. I happen to think GZ’s actions do NOT rise to the level of malice needed to prove 2nd degree murder, and I have become more reluctant to even view his actions as manslaughter. I’d like to explain my thinking a little.

I generally think he is a complete idiot. I think he made several stupid decisions. I think he SHOULD have announced who he was—but even though he didn’t, that ISN’T malice. I think he SHOULD have stayed in his truck—but he got out and followed TM. I think that was monumentally stupid, but not “malice”. Why do I think it wasn’t malice? Because he CALLED POLICE before he did either one. Any resident is free to call police at any time—even if it is a stupid call, a nuisance call,-- EVEN if it IS a racist making the call, etc. Mentally ill people can call police, children, criminals—ANYONE. The mere fact that GZ made a NEN call to police to report TM as suspicious is NOT a malicious act. The fact that he called police NEN REMOVES the implication of malice (for me, anyway) in the “first” meeting of GZ and TM, imo. He did not assault verbally or physically, or otherwise attack TM in the first meeting—and DID call police, therefore no malice there. He acted stupidly by his actions, but nothing he did was against the law at that point. He was LEGALLY carrying his concealed weapon, and there is NO EVIDENCE he brandished it, or otherwise did anything illegal with the gun. Maybe some think he was stupid to be packing a concealed weapon on his way to Target, but guess what? A lot of people in society of varying levels of intelligence AND stupidity have legally issued CCW permits.

Now the second meeting is where the whole thing gets interesting for me. Every single bit of evidence we have says to me that TM “got away” from this creepy strange man. GZ himself says he lost sight of him in his remarks to the dispatcher. So now we have a “new” situation separate from the first encounter, imo. Up till this point, there was a teen walking in the neighborhood of his father’s GF to her apartment, and a creepy neighborhood watch guy hyper vigilant for any person who appeared out of place or suspicious. (That is not unreasonable, given the level of recent crime in this apartment complex.) GZ did what he was supposed to do as a NW person—he called police, BUT—he got out of his car to follow. Does follow equal pursuit? I don’t think it necessarily does in this situation, but it could in other “chase” situations. And if it was pursuit, does pursuit equal malice? I don’t think it does, in this situation. There is no indication and no evidence he was chasing down TM with his gun drawn. He was trying to keep him in sight, knowing police were on the way. That STILL isn’t malice, imo.

In the course of that second situation, the evidence persuades me that TM did “get away”, and made the decision to double back and preemptively assault GZ—either to teach the creepy guy a lesson, or for some other reason. What is apparent is that GZ was NOT assaulting TM at the point that TM chose to assault GZ. What TM also did NOT do is express fear or concern such as telling Dee Dee to call 911. TM chose to assault FIRST (IMO), in this second encounter, from all that the EVIDENCE points to, including eye witnesses. That is very clearly a crime.

The gunshot was at point blank range with TM witnessed on top of GZ hitting him. Once that detail came out, the case for 2nd degree murder, imo, was severely weakened. He didn’t “gun down” a defenseless, running, unarmed kid—this was hand to hand combat, initiated by TM, and GZ was the one being physically assaulted. There is no way anyone can convince me that the one on top doing the punching was the one wailing for help—that is purely my opinion. I think GZ was scared and crying for help—and he KNEW he had called police and they were coming. He was terrified of this person (who now had confirmed his suspicions to him that he was up to no good by attacking him and beating him up), and shot him from a place of fear. Fear of further injury and fear of his life. For pete’s sake—the attacker was on top of him. He wasn’t required to lay there and be beaten into unconsciousness and/ or death to be justified in defending himself. It is tremendously sad and unfortunate that this 17 year old teen chose to hit first—another stupid decision—but I am convinced by GZ’s actions before, during, and after, that he didn’t have “malice” in his heart when he shot TM, but FEAR. I don’t believe TM was in a position to legally justify his preemptive assault against GZ—he GOT AWAY from him, and chose to come back to assault. I am convinced that TM was expressing ANGER—perhaps borne of fear, or borne of bravado—who knows. I am equally convinced that TM would be alive if he had not assaulted GZ first. GZ made several stupid decisions, but so did TM. When 2 nervous, stupid people meet, one assaults the other, and one has a gun, something like this can happen. That is not “blaming” the victim—it’s the reality of the situation. TM, just as GZ, DOES bear some responsibility for his actions, imo. He CHOSE to get physical with GZ. That choice cost him his life. GZ could just as easily have been killed if TM had been carrying a gun. He is now embroiled in the fall out from shooting this teen—and regardless of what happens in court, he will be surrounded by the implications of that for the rest of his life. He will be lucky to not be gunned down himself by an angry mob if he is ever free in society again. He will be lucky to ever have a job again, etc. His life will suck for a long, long time, EVEN if he is not put in prison by a jury.

GZ didn’t “run” after he shot TM—he has cooperated at every step. Yes, he lied about the $$ in the donation account—he and Shellie are none too bright. They will face consequences for those lies. But that lie doesn’t equal malice either. Yes, he and his family are thoroughly unlikable—but that isn’t malice either.

Yes, maybe his injuries were not as “severe” as many would like them to be to justify his shooting TM, but he WAS injured prior to the shooting (his head and face no less)—and TM was not. It’s ludicrous, imo, to even suggest that GZ somehow quickly sized up the situation and self inflicted his injuries to get himself “out of trouble”—laughable, in light of how many times he called for help. He is just not bright enough to mastermind a big plan to gun down a defenseless “kid”. And he’s not a hulking racist polishing his gun and starching his pointed hat. He’s a dumb$h!# with a gun. It's just that simple. And TM was a not-so-bright teen with a lot of (ahem) “difficulties” in his background shaping HIS response to the situation. He wasn’t a little kid. He would have been charged as an adult if he committed crimes, so making him out to be a sweet 12 year old in a football jersey is just NOT who this teen was, imo. He was a kid clearly headed down the wrong path, in a lot of trouble at school, dabbling in illegal drugs and burglary and graffiti, posturing with a gangster persona (like a lot of other kids, yes), with largely ineffective/ absent parental supervision and guidance. I sincerely doubt that he was on track to graduate on time, with all of his school behavior problems. That is all my opinion—and doesn’t mean I’m “bashing” the victim—it simply EXPLAINS how he came to be in the situation he was in with GZ at that apartment complex hours from his home in the dark and rain, alone, unsupervised, and why he behaved the way he did. For pete’s sake—his own FATHER didn’t even worry that he didn’t come home all night, and didn’t even know where he was, or try to find him till the next day. That is a pattern of parenting behavior, imo. And some people think this is perfectly okay? But we can’t criticize that, because they are grieving parents?? This was a tragedy that could be repeated in every city in this country any day of the week, but for the actions of the “handlers” and the media mangling and manipulating the story into a racist encounter, and a malicious (imo) prosecutor appointed to quell the impending riots. There are thousands, maybe millions of GZ’s and TM’s who could come into a chance encounter like this, with tragic outcome. It never was the “racist” situation it was presented to be in the media, imo, and the campaign of the Handlers and the parents manipulated the whole situation into a fraudulent social frenzy, cloaked in victimhood. TM’s parents are grieving the loss of this teen, but the reality is that his own behavior, background, and upbringing DID contribute to his death in this situation. And that has got to be incredibly painful for his parents to face, if they ever will. GZ will live with the consequences of HIS actions every day for the rest of his life. A bunch of transparently evil racists put a PUBLIC bounty on his head, and faced NO consequences for doing so—and many prominent people and media organizations advanced utter and outright lies to figuratively “lynch” GZ in the court of public opinion--that should bother and disgust every citizen to the core of their soul. And while GZ’s life is ruined, I don’t still don’t think he committed any kind of murder, and I’m not persuaded that what he did was manslaughter. The whole thing is just a tremendous tragedy, imo. And neither GZ nor TM are innocent, pure, and blameless, imo.

(Rant complete.)

KZ -

You have layed out the Defense's case point by point. I have been reading about Trayvon's home life and sadly it seems he was unsupervised much of the time. 53 recorded absentees from school and 3 suspensions and school had only started in late August, this in a span of 6 months. Trayvon averaged approx, 8-9 days without attending school every month and this does not include his 3 suspensions and those accumulated days.

The fight video of Trayvon being the ref is probably going to come into Court, someone even called Trayvon by name. imo, all these factors plus more that we don't know about yet from the defense. A 10 day suspension is a BIG DEAL, especially in high school. Trayvon's cousin sent a tweet referring to a fight with the bus driver, that WOULD bring a 10 day suspension, but if true, I am sure MOM/West will get to the bottom of it and do depositions. Trayvon was NOT suspended for tardiness, that's ridiculous, imo, an excuse to possibly cover the altercation with the bus driver. G Bush's "no child left behind" does not allow suspensions for tardiness, imo, more lies that will be proven, and I have no doubt the exact reasons for all the suspensions will come out in court. Bashing the victim? imo, the facts of Trayvon's life should not be considered bashing, the facts will show the person Trayvon was and possibly help explain the decisions he made.

Will the gansta pictures and the gold teeth come in? imo, yes.

by Freckles Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:43 pm

Removed by poster.

by Freckles Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:56 pm

This is almost funny.
Again, the addresses are plainly posted next to the garage door. GZ may have been looking to his left and indicating the backs of houses BUT the homes to his right ALL have their addresses clearly posted.

Again, where he says he fell is NO where near where TM's body was found.

Rather than screaming help me, help me! why didn't GZ simply push redial on his phone? Or, dial 911?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PX1sxARNq_c#!

by KimmyK Sun Dec 30, 2012 10:01 pm

art tart wrote:
KZ wrote:(Sorry in advance for the very long post. Feel free to scroll past if you like! I’m gonna rant a bit-- a few thousand words.)

I’ve done a lot of reading and thinking about the concept of “malice” that is necessary to prove 2nd degree murder. I first became intrigued with the concept of malice as it applies to doctors (and other health care professionals) who are so breathtakingly negligent that they cause the death of another human being in the course of caring for them professionally. At a certain point, it sure seems to me that highly reckless departure from professional standards meets the criteria for knowing that one’s conduct “could” cause death—which is part of the concept of malice necessary to prove 2nd degree murder. One example of such egregious incompetence was that of Dr. Roberto Bonilla in California (google him), and another was Conrad Murray (Michael Jackson’s doctor). I still feel that their conduct rose to such an egregious level, with an awareness of this recklessness, that both should have been charged with second degree murder—but both were “only” charged with involuntary manslaughter (and convicted). The “involuntary” part is what set me on a quest to try to understand what is going on in the minds of prosecutors, the law, and the political environment in which doctors practice. The interesting component about the “involuntary” issue for physicians is that as long as they say they “believe” their conduct was not reckless, they are presumed to no hold any malice, and therefore 2nd degree charges aren’t pursued.

I had long been puzzled “why” doctors appear to be “immune” to second degree murder charges—their MD provides a golden parachute that is seldom challenged by prosecutors, no matter how egregious their conduct in caring for patients. For example, a drunk doctor driving into the hospital who kills someone can be charged with 2nd degree murder, but that same drunk doctor wielding a scalpel in the OR who injures or kill a patient can, at most, be charged with involuntary manslaughter. Prosecutors will almost never risk bringing 2nd degree murder charges against a doctor for actions in the course of their professional care. MALICE is the issue. It is a hugely complex area of law, and separates manslaughter from murder. A doctor, in the course of his/ her work, is NEVER presumed to be functioning from a place of “malice”, and therefore can almost never be charged with second degree murder. In essence, a doctor (even an impaired one) is presumed to be functioning from a position of “helping”, which is antithetical to malice. So when an impaired doctor kills someone, the charges are typically civil negligence, or if the situation is so immensely extreme (like Bonilla’s and Murray’s), the most we usually see is involuntary manslaughter—and even that is rare.

For the average person, we are held to a different standard in our conduct in society. We are charged with making determinations about whether our conduct “could” reasonably cause another person’s death—such as driving our cars drunk, or brandishing a weapon, or firing a “warning” shot at our abusive husbands (Marissa Alexander, prosecuted by Angela Corey). That is just beginning to scratch the surface about what the law sees as “malice”, which is essential in 2nd degree charges. Important to state here that “malice” is a WHOLE LOT different than just garden variety stupidity, or just making dumb decisions. This is where GZ comes in, imo. And I really hope MOM does a good job in court (if it gets to court) explaining malice to the jurors. An understanding of malice is essential for determining if he is guilty of 2nd degree murder. I happen to think GZ’s actions do NOT rise to the level of malice needed to prove 2nd degree murder, and I have become more reluctant to even view his actions as manslaughter. I’d like to explain my thinking a little.

I generally think he is a complete idiot. I think he made several stupid decisions. I think he SHOULD have announced who he was—but even though he didn’t, that ISN’T malice. I think he SHOULD have stayed in his truck—but he got out and followed TM. I think that was monumentally stupid, but not “malice”. Why do I think it wasn’t malice? Because he CALLED POLICE before he did either one. Any resident is free to call police at any time—even if it is a stupid call, a nuisance call,-- EVEN if it IS a racist making the call, etc. Mentally ill people can call police, children, criminals—ANYONE. The mere fact that GZ made a NEN call to police to report TM as suspicious is NOT a malicious act. The fact that he called police NEN REMOVES the implication of malice (for me, anyway) in the “first” meeting of GZ and TM, imo. He did not assault verbally or physically, or otherwise attack TM in the first meeting—and DID call police, therefore no malice there. He acted stupidly by his actions, but nothing he did was against the law at that point. He was LEGALLY carrying his concealed weapon, and there is NO EVIDENCE he brandished it, or otherwise did anything illegal with the gun. Maybe some think he was stupid to be packing a concealed weapon on his way to Target, but guess what? A lot of people in society of varying levels of intelligence AND stupidity have legally issued CCW permits.

Now the second meeting is where the whole thing gets interesting for me. Every single bit of evidence we have says to me that TM “got away” from this creepy strange man. GZ himself says he lost sight of him in his remarks to the dispatcher. So now we have a “new” situation separate from the first encounter, imo. Up till this point, there was a teen walking in the neighborhood of his father’s GF to her apartment, and a creepy neighborhood watch guy hyper vigilant for any person who appeared out of place or suspicious. (That is not unreasonable, given the level of recent crime in this apartment complex.) GZ did what he was supposed to do as a NW person—he called police, BUT—he got out of his car to follow. Does follow equal pursuit? I don’t think it necessarily does in this situation, but it could in other “chase” situations. And if it was pursuit, does pursuit equal malice? I don’t think it does, in this situation. There is no indication and no evidence he was chasing down TM with his gun drawn. He was trying to keep him in sight, knowing police were on the way. That STILL isn’t malice, imo.

In the course of that second situation, the evidence persuades me that TM did “get away”, and made the decision to double back and preemptively assault GZ—either to teach the creepy guy a lesson, or for some other reason. What is apparent is that GZ was NOT assaulting TM at the point that TM chose to assault GZ. What TM also did NOT do is express fear or concern such as telling Dee Dee to call 911. TM chose to assault FIRST (IMO), in this second encounter, from all that the EVIDENCE points to, including eye witnesses. That is very clearly a crime.

The gunshot was at point blank range with TM witnessed on top of GZ hitting him. Once that detail came out, the case for 2nd degree murder, imo, was severely weakened. He didn’t “gun down” a defenseless, running, unarmed kid—this was hand to hand combat, initiated by TM, and GZ was the one being physically assaulted. There is no way anyone can convince me that the one on top doing the punching was the one wailing for help—that is purely my opinion. I think GZ was scared and crying for help—and he KNEW he had called police and they were coming. He was terrified of this person (who now had confirmed his suspicions to him that he was up to no good by attacking him and beating him up), and shot him from a place of fear. Fear of further injury and fear of his life. For pete’s sake—the attacker was on top of him. He wasn’t required to lay there and be beaten into unconsciousness and/ or death to be justified in defending himself. It is tremendously sad and unfortunate that this 17 year old teen chose to hit first—another stupid decision—but I am convinced by GZ’s actions before, during, and after, that he didn’t have “malice” in his heart when he shot TM, but FEAR. I don’t believe TM was in a position to legally justify his preemptive assault against GZ—he GOT AWAY from him, and chose to come back to assault. I am convinced that TM was expressing ANGER—perhaps borne of fear, or borne of bravado—who knows. I am equally convinced that TM would be alive if he had not assaulted GZ first. GZ made several stupid decisions, but so did TM. When 2 nervous, stupid people meet, one assaults the other, and one has a gun, something like this can happen. That is not “blaming” the victim—it’s the reality of the situation. TM, just as GZ, DOES bear some responsibility for his actions, imo. He CHOSE to get physical with GZ. That choice cost him his life. GZ could just as easily have been killed if TM had been carrying a gun. He is now embroiled in the fall out from shooting this teen—and regardless of what happens in court, he will be surrounded by the implications of that for the rest of his life. He will be lucky to not be gunned down himself by an angry mob if he is ever free in society again. He will be lucky to ever have a job again, etc. His life will suck for a long, long time, EVEN if he is not put in prison by a jury.

GZ didn’t “run” after he shot TM—he has cooperated at every step. Yes, he lied about the $$ in the donation account—he and Shellie are none too bright. They will face consequences for those lies. But that lie doesn’t equal malice either. Yes, he and his family are thoroughly unlikable—but that isn’t malice either.

Yes, maybe his injuries were not as “severe” as many would like them to be to justify his shooting TM, but he WAS injured prior to the shooting (his head and face no less)—and TM was not. It’s ludicrous, imo, to even suggest that GZ somehow quickly sized up the situation and self inflicted his injuries to get himself “out of trouble”—laughable, in light of how many times he called for help. He is just not bright enough to mastermind a big plan to gun down a defenseless “kid”. And he’s not a hulking racist polishing his gun and starching his pointed hat. He’s a dumb$h!# with a gun. It's just that simple. And TM was a not-so-bright teen with a lot of (ahem) “difficulties” in his background shaping HIS response to the situation. He wasn’t a little kid. He would have been charged as an adult if he committed crimes, so making him out to be a sweet 12 year old in a football jersey is just NOT who this teen was, imo. He was a kid clearly headed down the wrong path, in a lot of trouble at school, dabbling in illegal drugs and burglary and graffiti, posturing with a gangster persona (like a lot of other kids, yes), with largely ineffective/ absent parental supervision and guidance. I sincerely doubt that he was on track to graduate on time, with all of his school behavior problems. That is all my opinion—and doesn’t mean I’m “bashing” the victim—it simply EXPLAINS how he came to be in the situation he was in with GZ at that apartment complex hours from his home in the dark and rain, alone, unsupervised, and why he behaved the way he did. For pete’s sake—his own FATHER didn’t even worry that he didn’t come home all night, and didn’t even know where he was, or try to find him till the next day. That is a pattern of parenting behavior, imo. And some people think this is perfectly okay? But we can’t criticize that, because they are grieving parents?? This was a tragedy that could be repeated in every city in this country any day of the week, but for the actions of the “handlers” and the media mangling and manipulating the story into a racist encounter, and a malicious (imo) prosecutor appointed to quell the impending riots. There are thousands, maybe millions of GZ’s and TM’s who could come into a chance encounter like this, with tragic outcome. It never was the “racist” situation it was presented to be in the media, imo, and the campaign of the Handlers and the parents manipulated the whole situation into a fraudulent social frenzy, cloaked in victimhood. TM’s parents are grieving the loss of this teen, but the reality is that his own behavior, background, and upbringing DID contribute to his death in this situation. And that has got to be incredibly painful for his parents to face, if they ever will. GZ will live with the consequences of HIS actions every day for the rest of his life. A bunch of transparently evil racists put a PUBLIC bounty on his head, and faced NO consequences for doing so—and many prominent people and media organizations advanced utter and outright lies to figuratively “lynch” GZ in the court of public opinion--that should bother and disgust every citizen to the core of their soul. And while GZ’s life is ruined, I don’t still don’t think he committed any kind of murder, and I’m not persuaded that what he did was manslaughter. The whole thing is just a tremendous tragedy, imo. And neither GZ nor TM are innocent, pure, and blameless, imo.

(Rant complete.)

KZ - You have layed out the Defense's case point by point. I have been reading about Trayvon's home life and sadly it seems he was unsupervised much of the time. 53 recorded absentees from school and 3 suspensions and school had only started in late August, this in a span of 6 months. Trayvon averaged approx, 8-9 days without attending school every month and this does not include his 3 suspensions and those accumulated days.

The fight video of Trayvon being the ref is probably going to come into Court, someone even called Trayvon by name. imo, all these factors plus more that we don't know about yet from the defense. A 10 day suspension is a BIG DEAL, especially in high school. Trayvon's cousin sent a tweet referring to a fight with the bus driver, that WOULD bring a 10 day suspension, but if true, I am sure MOM/West will get to the bottom of it and do depositions. Trayvon was NOT suspended for tardiness, that's ridiculous, imo, an excuse to possibly cover the altercation with the bus driver. G Bush's "no child left behind" does not allow suspensions for tardiness, imo, more lies that will be proven, and I have no doubt the exact reasons for all the suspensions will come out in court. Bashing the victim? imo, the facts of Trayvon's life should not be considered bashing, the facts will show the person Trayvon was and possibly help explain the decisions he made.

Will the gansta pictures and the gold teeth come in? imo, yes.

BBM-
Really? The decisions made by a 17 year old high school STUDENT (an adolescent), cannot even be reasonably compared to the decisions made by an ARMED 28 year old MAN, (an adult, with 11 more years life experience), an ex-bouncer (but who's carrying a GUN), who is also a CRIMINAL JUSTICE STUDENT who is near graduation...IMO there is no comparison, of the decisions made by a 28 year old man (WITH Criminal Justice Training), compared to an 17 year old adolescent...
Apparently GZ learned NOTHING in college!!! Then again maybe he did...
Was the 911 call his alibi to stalk and kill a "f---ing goon" since "they always get away?"
JMO

by Guest Sun Dec 30, 2012 10:09 pm

Freckles - I respectfully disagree with you and stand by my comment. It isn't important how many days a kid misses in elementary school as they can catch up with tutoring or their parent's working with them, but high school is another story. Sybrina said in the Essence Magazine article, can't remember which magazine bt I think that magazine that Trayvon had failed the test to graduate with his class. imo, it's really hard on any average student that misses 52-53 days of school and more days for suspensions. Trayvon was in trouble at school, that is a fact.

I am not branding Trayvon for his experiences, but, it does indicate the person Trayvon was, interested in street fighting, experimenting w/drugs, gold teeth, gansta culture, and found with a burglary tool and jewelry in which he could not give a believeable answer in one suspenion.

ABSOLUTELY no one has said that I have read that TM was deserving of his death, what has been stated is that TM was responsible for his actions and so is GZ, TM just didn't anticipate GZ having a gun. Trayvon is not the kid his parent's Handler's painted him out to be, why they didn't understand this would be part of this case is surprising to me.

by Sponsored content