AMonger
Veteran Expediter
What's going on with quotes? A monger showed me mine showed cheri.
Sent from my Fisher Price ABC-123.
I clicked reply and that's how it came out.
What's going on with quotes? A monger showed me mine showed cheri.
Sent from my Fisher Price ABC-123.
What's going on with quotes? A monger showed me mine showed cheri.
Sent from my Fisher Price ABC-123.
It is because of the way it was split up in Cheri's post.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app
The part about not being able to remove the weapon while being straddled was recently demonstrated by 2 students at a Kung Fu Academy in NY, the rest was taken from the documents [statements, photos, reports] released by the state of Fl.
I don't accept what "the media" says, until I've verified it.
You, OTOH, seem very willing to accept that Zimmerman told the truth, no matter what his history or common sense says.
OK, we can agree to disagree - but nothing I typed is wrong, and all of it is relevant, because Zimmerman is the only one who knows what happened, really.
That's why he was found not guilty: the state couldn't prove he was lying.
As I said before, better the guilty go free than the innocent don't.
I don't even know how to address what you say here, every single thing you said is wrong or irrelevant. You seemed to have picked up this "information" from CNBC, especially the part about not being able to get the gun out. The NW thing, Martin not being violent, Martin not having practiced fighting, it is all wrong. Stop buying what the media is selling.
Much of what you typed was wrong but you are refusing to acknowledge it.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app
Go ahead: find the proof that anything I typed was not supported by fact, or that I claimed it was, when it wasn't.
I speculated about Zimmerman grabbing Martin's arm, yes, because that's the only scenario that seems plausible to me, after reading every one of the linked docs.
Did you read any of them - or just the media versions of what happened?
Ignoring what doesn't fit? You mean, like:
Zimmerman was following Martin, but the only one who says Martin then followed Zimmerman is Zimmerman. Who has every reason to lie.
Zimmerman had a gun, Martin had a can of iced tea.
Zimmerman knew what was happening & why he was following Martin. Martin had no idea - in his shoes, I'd certainly have to consider some scary possibilities.
Zimmerman had 18 months of martial arts training, Martin had none.
Zimmerman had college courses on Criminal justice, Martin was a high school teenager.
Zimmerman had a documented history of assault and a restraining order taken against him. Martin had no violent history at all. [One text mgs claiming to have been in a fight, but no school suspensions for fighting]
Zimmerman told police at the scene that he had no arrests on his record: another lie. Martin had no arrests on his record.
Zimmerman's story changed several times, and what he claimed he did: unholstering his weapon while being straddled & getting his head slammed was shown to be impossible: a person being straddled cannot get his weapon out from under the assailant's weight - just can't happen.
Zimmerman says he turned Martin over afterwards & spread his arms out to hold him down, but Martin was found face down, arms pinned underneath.
[Aside: he shot a teen, and never even checked to see if the kid was still alive?!]
There are so many inconsistencies & holes in Zimmerman's account it would be incredible even if he were a truthful person, which he has a long and clear history of not being. He lied to the police [no arrest record], the judge [no money for defense], his family ["tutored black kids", printed & handed out flyers demanding justice for homeless beating victim" - and isn't that a delicious irony?!], neighbors [he was not NW, he simply said he was, and no one doubted it, because who would?] and his friends [a graduation party when he was nowhere near finished with school].
Those are just the ones I know about, but they show a clear picture of someone who doesn't hesitate to lie in order to improve his image or stature in the eye of the beholder. IOW: a common garden variety liar.The jury had no choice, but that doesn't make Zimmerman innocent.
If his life is ruined, at least he still has a life. I'd feel much safer, though, if he [and other self appointed vigilantes] weren't carrying concealed weapons around when they jump to the wrong conclusions.
I think you all are better at expediting then armchair lawyers..................it was a bad situation, but the bottom line-- pizz poor parenting and no male leadership in over 70 percent of black households just might be the key here..well you can look up those stats if you want to.
All this hand-ringing, and towel twisting and expressions of poor little minority crap is for the birds,,Read the family stats for yourself on black families and others.. The data is on the family unit and many minorities have no family unit. READ THE STATS
Martin was a product of poor parenting and the mother is going to work very hard to make sure someone else is to blame other than her.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app
No problem and I will also mention the irrelevant parts as well since that is a majority of it as I mentioned before.
That is an awfully big jump to make and is CLEARLY not supported by facts or evidence.
You find that a big jump, when RJ [on the phone with Martin] even said she'd suggested that the creepy guy following him might be a pervert?
What I consider an awfully big jump is the contention that a teenager who is there because he got suspended from school, doesn't know the neighbors at all, and is talking on the phone with a friend would suddenly go ballistic, for no apparent reason. The dialogue as reported by RJ [Martin: why you following me? Zimmerman: what are you doing around here? followed by Martin again: get off, get off!] sounds far more believable than the dialogue reported by Zimmerman [Martin: You got a problem? Zimmerman: no. followed by Martin again: "you do now, m-f'r!" then a sucker punch]
Z's version sounds artificial, like bad movie dialogue, all the way to M's last words: "you got me!"] I don't buy it.
Well since my belief of what happened, unlike yours, follows the evidence instead of what the media reported I'm not sure why you would think that.
Because you accept as facts things that Z claims, [M followed him, and attacked first] with zero evidence to back it up.
He really has no reason to lie since it is not illegal to follow someone which makes the statement irrelevant and not backed up by facts or evidence.
Z had/has very good reason to lie: prison. Self defense is one crime in which the perception of danger is critical, and Z created that perception by following M, and refusing to explain/ answer why when asked directly.
Irrelevant when someone attacks you.
Relevance goes to state of mind.
Irrelevant since Martin was not attacked and had no reason to defend himself, but it would mean Martin could be suspicious of Zimmerman.
See? The sole 'proof' that M wasn't attacked [or grabbed] first is Z's statement, which you're willing to accept as gospel. I'm not.
Wrong and misleading since it was a year not 18 months but Zimmerman had also taken a few months off as well during that year. Martin had street fighting practice which was what they were involved in.
Really?!! One text msg saying he got in a fight that lasted 3 rounds is hardly equivalent to actual formal training.
Irrelevant and has no bearing on anything other than emotion.
Is extremely relevant when the person who has the college classes in Criminal Justice is claiming self defense after killing someone who wasn't armed.
Zimmerman and an ex-fiancee took restraining orders out against each other. Zimmerman was accused of pushing a police officer(the assault) when he was drinking with a friend when they were underage. It was an undercover officer that Zimmerman said never identified himself, which apparently was an issue among that unit, and Zimmerman said the officer assaulted him first. Martin had a history of violence and being a thug but yet you claim he had no history, well you acknowledge then quickly dismiss it.
Yadda yadda yadda - Z did have a documented criminal history of assault, while M did not.
The charges were dropped against Zimmerman and I am not sure if they were expunged or not but it could be he thought that they were since the charge was waived which gives him the right to say he was not arrested before.
It could be he thought they were? Sure. That doesn't explain his not mentioning the restraining order, either. He gave the police the impression he was "squeaky clean", which is what they told M's father, but he was not being truthful and you know it.
As far as Martin not having an arrest record there is a very good reason why, it is called preferential treatment since he was black. The media doesn't like to acknowledge that Chief Hurley from the Miami School District PD was demoted and sent packing after it was discovered Martin should have been arrested at least twice but Hurley had officers forging reports so that he could claim a 60% reduction in arrests to prove they weren't racist.
Link, please. and I expect it to say specifically that M "should have been arrested twice", and why.
You know what didn't change though? The fact that Zimmerman passed a lie detector test about the important questions including the confrontation and following Martin.
You know why those tests are not admissible in court, right? Because they aren't reliable proof.
Do you have a link for a video from the martial arts school you say proved this?
No, because I can't remember the name of the school, or which article it was in. It seems to be perfectly reasonable to me, though: with someone pinning you down with their knees tucked tight against your sides, how do you get a gun out of your waistband holster? I don't think you can.
It was already established that Martin could have been alive for several minutes after the shooting giving him the chance to move or maybe Zimmerman tried piecing it together and was wrong, either way it is irrelevant.
Funny how every change in the story and impossible/unlikely claim Z made is irrelevant in your mind, considering how everything hinges upon his truthfulness.
They are only a problem because you have manufactured your own story about what happened and because you are trying to make something huge out of small things. There is evidence that he was very upset over the beating of the homeless black man and stood up to the police for him, ironically there is proof in one of the links you provided, plus there is video of him speaking out.
What 'evidence'? What 'proof'?
Oh, and did I mention the lie detector test showing he was being truthful?
The jury did have a choice and it was guilty or not guilty. I'm sure if you took all the dirt you could find on someone in their late 20's and condensed it down to a few sentences you could make anyone look bad. Just look at Martin, Zimmerman had a decade on him and Martin still had more problems and came out looking worse, well you would've had to look deeper than what the media told you to see it.
Martin looked worse? To whom? The kid was a good student with a few suspensions [which ain't real hard to do in the zero tolerance of today's schools] who liked math best and wanted to go to college and was interested in avionics. You're drawing conclusions from cellphone photos that have no context or explanation at all, except the spin you choose to place on them, but you don't really know at all.
Z was an adult college student who didn't graduate when he was scheduled to [but let the party go ahead anyhow] because he was failing classes. And if he wasn't in enough trouble, he got his wife arrested for felony perjury, thus ensuring that her nursing education is down the drain too. And you defend his honesty? Puuhhleeezze!!
I'd feel safer if criminal thugs like Martin weren't carrying illegal guns around or attacking people because they want to feel tough.
Not a criminal. Not a thug. And if we're going to assume we know what he wanted to feel, my guess is 'tough' would be pretty far down the list at that particular time & place - I'd think he just wanted to feel safe, with some unknown creepy guy following him around in the dark.
It's too bad he couldn't, and people like you continue to defend that.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app
A relatively minor point, but that's not entirely accurate. An arrest, and a disposition of charges are two distinctly different things. The charges can be waived or dismissed, and the arrest record still exists. Even if the charges are expunged, the arrest record still exists.The charges were dropped against Zimmerman and I am not sure if they were expunged or not but it could be he thought that they were since the charge was waived which gives him the right to say he was not arrested before.
Try this link:
Miami-Dade Schools Could Have Saved Travyon Martin?s Life by Arresting Him : The Other McCain
I know nothing about this writer but it only took one search to find this.
Martin's backpack was searched [looking for a marker after someone wrote "WTF?" on a school door], and the jewelry found [which Martin said was given to him by a friend] was turned over to the police, who found no evidence it had been stolen or reported missing. None. Referring to it as 'stolen jewelry' is just making up the angle that the writer wants to convey, but it's not the truth. As for the screwdriver, calling that a burglary tool is just ridiculous - there could be a dozen reasons for someone to carry a screwdriver that have nothing to do with breaking the law. Like being a teenager who doesn't own a car, and rides a bike, for one.
Here is a link to the Miami Herald story where they mention him being found with stolen jewelry in his back pack.
SANFORD: Multiple suspensions paint complicated portrait of Trayvon Martin - Trayvon Martin - MiamiHerald.com
You find that a big jump, when RJ [on the phone with Martin] even said she'd suggested that the creepy guy following him might be a pervert?
What I consider an awfully big jump is the contention that a teenager who is there because he got suspended from school, doesn't know the neighbors at all, and is talking on the phone with a friend would suddenly go ballistic, for no apparent reason. The dialogue as reported by RJ [Martin: why you following me? Zimmerman: what are you doing around here? followed by Martin again: get off, get off!] sounds far more believable than the dialogue reported by Zimmerman [Martin: You got a problem? Zimmerman: no. followed by Martin again: "you do now, m-f'r!" then a sucker punch] Z's version sounds artificial, like bad movie dialogue, all the way to M's last words: "you got me!"] I don't buy it.
Because you accept as facts things that Z claims, [M followed him, and attacked first] with zero evidence to back it up.
Z had/has very good reason to lie: prison. Self defense is one crime in which the perception of danger is critical, and Z created that perception by following M, and refusing to explain/ answer why when asked directly.
See? The sole 'proof' that M wasn't attacked [or grabbed] first is Z's statement, which you're willing to accept as gospel. I'm not.
Really?!! One text msg saying he got in a fight that lasted 3 rounds is hardly equivalent to actual formal training.
Is extremely relevant when the person who has the college classes in Criminal Justice is claiming self defense after killing someone who wasn't armed.
Yadda yadda yadda - Z did have a documented criminal history of assault, while M did not.
It could be he thought they were? Sure. That doesn't explain his not mentioning the restraining order, either. He gave the police the impression he was "squeaky clean", which is what they told M's father, but he was not being truthful and you know it.
Link, please. and I expect it to say specifically that M "should have been arrested twice", and why.
You know why those tests are not admissible in court, right? Because they aren't reliable proof.
No, because I can't remember the name of the school, or which article it was in. It seems to be perfectly reasonable to me, though: with someone pinning you down with their knees tucked tight against your sides, how do you get a gun out of your waistband holster? I don't think you can.
Funny how every change in the story and impossible/unlikely claim Z made is irrelevant in your mind, considering how everything hinges upon his truthfulness.
What 'evidence'? What 'proof'?
Martin looked worse? To whom?
The kid was a good student with a few suspensions [which ain't real hard to do in the zero tolerance of today's schools] who liked math best and wanted to go to college and was interested in avionics.
You're drawing conclusions from cellphone photos that have no context or explanation at all, except the spin you choose to place on them, but you don't really know at all.
Z was an adult college student who didn't graduate when he was scheduled to [but let the party go ahead anyhow] because he was failing classes. And if he wasn't in enough trouble, he got his wife arrested for felony perjury, thus ensuring that her nursing education is down the drain too. And you defend his honesty? Puuhhleeezze!!
Not a criminal. Not a thug. And if we're going to assume we know what he wanted to feel, my guess is 'tough' would be pretty far down the list at that particular time & place - I'd think he just wanted to feel safe, with some unknown creepy guy following him around in the dark.It's too bad he couldn't, and people like you continue to defend that.
Enough already. You choose to believe that Zimmerman is an honest person who told the truth, and Martin was a thug.
I choose to believe neither of those is true.
BTW: about that "Little Trayvon" remark? When I was in my senior year of high school, I probably didn't show up 50 days the entire year, and somehow managed to be a productive and law abiding citizen anyhow. Like Zimmerman, you make assumptions that might just possibly be completely unfounded.
Here is some stuff in Chattanooga tn , we can solve and it never made headlines news, why,,,no money in it and hey,,,Chattanooga has just as much violence as the Zimmerman case, so why not Chattanooga on the news,,,,,,,,,,its all about the money and stiring the pot,imho.4 people shot on an Street in Chattanooga | timesfreepress.com