Zimmerman Passed Police Lie Detector Test Day After Trayvon Martin Killing [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Zimmerman Passed Police Lie Detector Test Day After Trayvon Martin Killing


Pages : [1] 2

DOC44
06-26-2012, 12:48
George Zimmerman Passed Police Lie Detector Test Day After Trayvon Martin Killing

According to a “confidential report” prepared by the Sanford Police Department, Zimmerman willingly submitted to a computer voice stress analyzer (CVSA) “truth verification” on February 27. Investigators concluded that he “has told substantially the complete truth in regards to this examination.”

Zimmerman, the report noted, “was classified as No Deception Indicated (NDI).”



http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/george-zimmerman-lie-detector-421395

Doc44

FFR Spyder GT
06-26-2012, 13:02
Doesn't mean a thing.

Most habitual liars can even lie about their own name, date of birth, etc while standing on their hear and get a "NDI".

That's why they are not admissible in court.

DOC44
06-26-2012, 13:06
Doesn't mean a thing.

Most habitual liars can even lie about their own name, date of birth, etc while standing on their hear and get a "NDI".

That's why they are not admissible in court.

Depends on the operator.... I ran a polygraph machine for years.... I can tell you things about yourself that you don't admitt to yourself.

Doc44

countrygun
06-26-2012, 13:23
Depends on the operator.... I ran a polygraph machine for years.... I can tell you things about yourself that you don't admitt to yourself.

Doc44


Don't bother Spyder with facts, he has managed to make up his mind without them. He finds speculation and imagination more reliable so he dimisses anything that conflicts with them.

gwalchmai
06-26-2012, 13:46
Trayvon didn't pass no lie detector.

FFR Spyder GT
06-26-2012, 22:24
Don't bother Spyder with facts, he has managed to make up his mind without them. He finds speculation and imagination more reliable so he dimisses anything that conflicts with them.

Nope, just the opposite.

I look at the facts, all the facts, then I decide.

I do not need Murdock, Rush, Beck or Sean to tell me what I need to believe in or agree with.

Spyder

cowboy1964
06-26-2012, 22:30
Whether they are accurate or not is irrelevant, as pointed out they are not admissable.

countrygun
06-26-2012, 22:33
Nope, just the opposite.

I look at the facts, all the facts, then I decide.

I do not need Murdock, Rush, Beck or Sean to tell me what I need to believe in or agree with.

Spyder

Glad to hear that nobody reliable is responsible for your opinions then. BTW do you still think Zimmermans first descriptive of Martin was "He's black" like the MSM taught you?

FFR Spyder GT
06-26-2012, 22:34
Depends on the operator.... I ran a polygraph machine for years.... I can tell you things about yourself that you don't admitt to yourself.

Doc44

I've taken numerous polygraph test and was taught by Uncle Sam how to beat them.

Once you're trained or you figure out how to beat them it's a piece of cake.

Nuthin' to it. That's why they're not admissible in court.

I took one years ago and answered every question truthfully, like name, age, DOB, etc., basically all the stuff used to establish your baseline and afterward the examiner said that I never truthfully answered a single question including my baseline responses.

It's a machine with a human operating it so it can be tricked.

cowboywannabe
06-26-2012, 23:11
They are not admissable to use against a defendent, but the defense will surely ask in court what the results were.

Oh, and dont let word out that the z-man passed a lie detector test, it doesnt fit the media's story line well.

Fed Five Oh
06-26-2012, 23:45
Depends on the operator.... I ran a polygraph machine for years.... I can tell you things about yourself that you don't admitt to yourself.

Doc44

If you ran a polygraph, then you will know that the voice stress analyzer is 100 percent pure junk.

BTW, ,must add that Zimmerman is not guilty of a crime.

cowboywannabe
06-27-2012, 01:56
If you ran a polygraph, then you will know that the voice stress analyzer is 100 percent pure junk.

BTW, ,must add that Zimmerman is not guilty of a crime.

ive had the north ridgeville p.d. in ohio tell me its better than a polygraph.:whistling:

Snowman92D
06-27-2012, 02:32
I've taken numerous polygraph test and was taught by Uncle Sam how to beat them.

I knew it...! I had you pegged for a secret CIA undercover operative from the git-go. :wow:

gwalchmai
06-27-2012, 04:38
I do not need Murdock, Rush, Beck or Sean to tell me what I need to believe in or agree with. No, not while you have Rachel...

I've taken numerous polygraph test and was taught by Uncle Sam how to beat them. Just keeps getting better. :rofl:

DOC44
06-27-2012, 05:53
If you ran a polygraph, then you will know that the voice stress analyzer is 100 percent pure junk.

BTW, ,must add that Zimmerman is not guilty of a crime.

The old needle and ink machine which used heart rate/bp, breathing rate and depth, and skin galvanomic responce is quite reliable and telling. If a person wants to keep the lie detector session from being reliable it is easy; control breathing, contracting quads and moving. This makes the session unreliable but does not show "no deception indicated" it would show "subject uncoopperative".

Doc44

Fed Five Oh
06-27-2012, 05:57
The old needle and ink machine which used heart rate/bp, breathing rate and depth, and skin galvanomic responce is quite reliable and telling. If a person wants to keep the lie detector session from being reliable it is easy; control breathing, contracting quads and moving. This makes the session unreliable but does not show "no deception indicated" it would show "subject uncoopperative".

Doc44They used the voice stress analyzer, not the polygraph.

DOC44
06-27-2012, 06:04
They used the voice stress analyzer, not the polygraph.

Never used one so I can't comment but like so many things today, they are used for ease in use; no hook-up and ink to mess with... quick and easy.:dunno:

Doc44

Bren
06-27-2012, 06:16
Doesn't mean a thing.

Most habitual liars can even lie about their own name, date of birth, etc while standing on their hear and get a "NDI".

That's why they are not admissible in court.

Yeah, OK.

I think just the fact that there has not been one shred of evidence to dispute his account is a pretty good indication. There is no way to make a rational argument that he lied, because there has been no evidence to base it on.

Cavalry Doc
06-27-2012, 06:17
Doesn't mean a thing.

Most habitual liars can even lie about their own name, date of birth, etc while standing on their hear and get a "NDI".

That's why they are not admissible in court.

That's a pretty serious charge. What did you use to come to the conclusion that he is a habitual liar???!

http://emob127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/Untitled-1.jpg?t=1338426443

Bren
06-27-2012, 06:18
I've taken numerous polygraph test and was taught by Uncle Sam how to beat them.

Once you're trained or you figure out how to beat them it's a piece of cake.

Nuthin' to it. That's why they're not admissible in court.

I took one years ago and answered every question truthfully, like name, age, DOB, etc., basically all the stuff used to establish your baseline and afterward the examiner said that I never truthfully answered a single question including my baseline responses.

It's a machine with a human operating it so it can be tricked.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:
:mallninja:
:upeyes:

Bren
06-27-2012, 06:20
That's a pretty serious charge. What did you use to come to the conclusion that he is a habitual liar???!

Some members just have more expertise in that area.:rofl:
Did you see the part where the government trained him to fool polygraphs?:rofl:

Cavalry Doc
06-27-2012, 06:21
I've taken numerous polygraph test and was taught by Uncle Sam how to beat them.

Once you're trained or you figure out how to beat them it's a piece of cake.

Nuthin' to it. That's why they're not admissible in court.

I took one years ago and answered every question truthfully, like name, age, DOB, etc., basically all the stuff used to establish your baseline and afterward the examiner said that I never truthfully answered a single question including my baseline responses.

It's a machine with a human operating it so it can be tricked.

Were you sworn in prior to the test? If so, I think you just admitted to a crime.

What was it that you needed to hide????! Drug use? Selling classified materials? Improper conduct?

Considering the post you made first in this thread, you just admitted to all of us, that you are a habitual liar.

Wouldn't it be interesting if the guys that administered those tests got a hold of this post? I think it would be.

JFrame
06-27-2012, 06:25
We're talking a different level of scrutiny, but there are businesses and organizations that place a premium on polygraph tests. Defense contractors can't get employees into certain levels of intelligence work if they can't pass, or refuse to take, full-scope polys.


.

series1811
06-27-2012, 06:28
I've taken numerous polygraph test and was taught by Uncle Sam how to beat them.

Once you're trained or you figure out how to beat them it's a piece of cake.

Nuthin' to it. That's why they're not admissible in court.

I took one years ago and answered every question truthfully, like name, age, DOB, etc., basically all the stuff used to establish your baseline and afterward the examiner said that I never truthfully answered a single question including my baseline responses.

It's a machine with a human operating it so it can be tricked.

Yeah, anybody can beat them. That's why all the intelligence agencies, and federal law enforcement agencies use them to screen informants, assets, new hires, and re-ups. Because they are so unreliable.

Cavalry Doc
06-27-2012, 06:29
Some members just have more expertise in that area.:rofl:
Did you see the part where the government trained him to fool polygraphs?:rofl:

Yep, he must be the habitual liar he claimed Zimmerman was. Especially considering there is no evidence that Zimmerman had any previous tests if this nature.

The brain spackle is strong in this one.

Skyhook
06-27-2012, 06:30
Nope, just the opposite.

I look at the facts, all the facts, then I decide.

I do not need Murdock, Rush, Beck or Sean to tell me what I need to believe in or agree with.

Spyder


"All the facts"? Are all those facts based upon evidence??

It seems that there are some folks in that community, as in this one, who feel Trayvon should have been allowed to go 'wilding' with impunity and to stop him was 'dissing' him. Also that Zimmerman needs lynching.:upeyes:

TBO
06-27-2012, 10:20
Investigator: Zimmerman missed opportunities to defuse situation

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

Lethaltxn
06-27-2012, 10:41
I've taken numerous polygraph test and was taught by Uncle Sam how to beat them.

Once you're trained or you figure out how to beat them it's a piece of cake.

Nuthin' to it. That's why they're not admissible in court.

I took one years ago and answered every question truthfully, like name, age, DOB, etc., basically all the stuff used to establish your baseline and afterward the examiner said that I never truthfully answered a single question including my baseline responses.

It's a machine with a human operating it so it can be tricked.

http://img.tapatalk.com/417c5e0a-3785-5308.jpg

First thing that came to mind after reading this bilge.

Guss
06-27-2012, 10:45
Investigator: Zimmerman missed opportunities to defuse situation

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

Interesting article. The detective has nothing to back up his allegations and now he is no longer a detective.

DOC44
06-27-2012, 10:51
Interesting article. The detective has nothing to back up his allegations and now he is no longer a detective.

Just his "what if" "possibly" "maybe if he had" opinion of a Monday morning quarterback.

Doc44

Guss
06-27-2012, 10:51
While I believe that "lie detectors" are a marginal science, I think what's really important is that Zimmerman was willing to take one and didn't even bother with an attorney. It demonstrates a person being open and candid.

Cavalry Doc
06-27-2012, 10:56
Investigator: Zimmerman missed opportunities to defuse situation

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

Did trayvon miss any opportunities also? Somehow the story didn't mention that part of it.

DOC44
06-27-2012, 11:12
While I believe that "lie detectors" are a marginal science, I think what's really important is that Zimmerman was willing to take one and didn't even bother with an attorney. It demonstrates a person being open and candid.

It would be interesting to have the detective (now patrolman) take a polygraph test to see what he truly thought or what he thought he ought to think.:dunno:

Doc44

Bren
06-27-2012, 11:42
Interesting article. The detective has nothing to back up his allegations and now he is no longer a detective.

And, to take that one step farther, even if what the detective said was true, it would be legally irrelevant to whether Zimmerman was justified. Even in "duty to retreat" states, verbally diffusing the situation is irrelevant to justification.

Guss
06-27-2012, 11:50
It would be interesting to have the detective (now patrolman) take a polygraph test to see what he truly thought or what he thought he ought to think.:dunno:

Doc44
Maybe they DID test him.

Goaltender66
06-27-2012, 12:06
I've taken numerous polygraph test and was taught by Uncle Sam how to beat them.


Was that before or after you learned how to parse union contracts for your buddies?

You apparently have led a very rich, eventful life. I rarely see people on the Internet with such a broad skill set.

JFrame
06-27-2012, 12:34
Was that before or after you learned how to parse union contracts for your buddies?

You apparently have led a very rich, eventful life. I rarely see people on the Internet with such a broad skill set.


Perhaps he is also a farm veterinarian or has degrees in physics from Stanford and M.I.T.


.

whoflungdo
06-27-2012, 12:44
Perhaps he is also a farm veterinarian or has degrees in physics from Stanford and M.I.T.


.

Would this be the same one that puts down large animals with a .22 because its more effective than the larger calibers??? If so, I've missed him...

gwalchmai
06-27-2012, 12:47
Perhaps he has multiple martial arts certifications...

JFrame
06-27-2012, 12:48
Would this be the same one that puts down large animals with a .22 because its more effective than the larger calibers??? If so, I've missed him...


That be the one...! :supergrin:

Clearly, one of the more missed screen-names in our rogues' gallery of prevaricating trolls...


.

FFR Spyder GT
06-27-2012, 13:21
Did trayvon miss any opportunities also? Somehow the story didn't mention that part of it.

Sure he did.

But as 17yo boys, we all do.

Doc, as a 17yo boy did you ever make a mistake that you wish you had a "do over" on?

I can think of a couple that I wish I had a "do over" on when I was 17yo.

Luckily I lived through mine and could learn from my mistakes.

Martin doesn't have that opportunity.

As for all the personal attacks.........

Bring 'em on. When all you can do is to attack me personally means you don't have any proof to back up your statements.

Me an ex-CIA guy?

Nope. Just a Disabled Combat Veteran. Spent 4 years fighting the Evil Commies in Central America. Got out and played 2 seasons of College Football the went back in for another 3 years fighting the "War on Drugs". Got out again. Worked for Uncle Sam as a Gov't Contractor through the US Dept of State working with the same group as a civilian that I was assigned to while on active duty.

During the "War on Drugs" we were exposed to large sums of cash and drugs and as a result of this exposure we had to routinely take drug test and polygraph test. Somewhere along the line someone decided that it was in the USA's best interest if we knew how to beat a polygraph test.

It's easy to do if you know how the test works based on heart rate, blood pressure, breathing, etc. Especially if you take a Valium a half hour before the test.

So, flame away all you want it doesn't bother me the lest little bit because I just consider the source that it's coming from.

Spyder

P.S. if anyone wants proof of my Disabled Veteran status all you have to do is ask for and I'll be glad to post proof that I'm a Disabled Veteran.

whoflungdo
06-27-2012, 13:29
Sure he did.

But as 17yo boys, we all do.

Doc, as a 17yo boy did you ever make a mistake that you wish you had a "do over" on?

I can think of a couple that I wish I had a "do over" on when I was 17yo.

Luckily I lived through mine and could learn from my mistakes.

Martin doesn't have that opportunity.

As for all the personal attacks.........

Bring 'em on. When all you can do is to attack me personally means you don't have any proof to back up your statements.

Me an ex-CIA guy?

Nope. Just a Disabled Combat Veteran. Spent 4 years fighting the Evil Commies in Central America. Got out and played 2 seasons of College Football the went back in for another 3 years fighting the "War on Drugs". Got out again. Worked for Uncle Sam as a Gov't Contractor through the US Dept of State working with the same group as a civilian that I was assigned to while on active duty.

During the "War on Drugs" we were exposed to large sums of cash and drugs and as a result of this exposure we had to routinely take drug test and polygraph test. Somewhere along the line someone decided that it was in the USA's best interest if we knew how to beat a polygraph test.

It's easy to do if you know how the test works based on heart rate, blood pressure, breathing, etc. Especially if you take a Valium a half hour before the test.

So, flame away all you want it doesn't bother me the lest little bit because I just consider the source that it's coming from.

Spyder

P.S. if anyone wants proof of my Disabled Veteran status all you have to do is ask for and I'll be glad to post proof that I'm a Disabled Veteran.


So, um... how did you play college football if you were disabled? Because you either played disabled or went back and worked as a contractor with your same active duty unit disabled. Please enlighten us...

I sure hope you didn't kill or hurt anyone that was a young adult that just made a mistake, or didn't get a do over, or that wasn't able to live through his/her mistakes during your fighting of the Evil Commies or the War on Drugs. I hate for you to end up being a hypocrite...

FFR Spyder GT
06-27-2012, 13:37
You apparently have led a very rich, eventful life. I rarely see people on the Internet with such a broad skill set.

+1 Goaltender66!

Yes I did! Thanks to Uncle Sam I've been all over the World. Been to 25 different countries, 41 states and have lived in Little Rock, AR, Jackson, MS, Dallas (several times) and San Antonio, TX, The Chicago area, Orlando, LA, and the Seattle-Tacoma area. Currently living east of Hot Springs, AR.

Wife gets a vacation July 14-22 so we're heading to Cancun. Going to stay at the GR Solaris for a week of fun in the sun.

http://www.clubsolaris.com/v4/en/gr-solaris-resort-in-cancun.html

Going "All inclusive" is the only way to go. It's one of the nicer places in Cancun so if you want ever want to take the wife to Cancun we give it 2 thumbs up. We went there back in Feb '11 and are going back again.

Spyder

JFrame
06-27-2012, 14:07
So, um... how did you play college football if you were disabled? Because you either played disabled or went back and worked as a contractor with your same active duty unit disabled. Please enlighten us...


Perhaps it was a brain disability. You know what they say about linemen... :whistling:


.

whoflungdo
06-27-2012, 14:18
Perhaps it was a brain disability. You know what they say about linemen... :whistling:


.


Lineman??? They don't win the games.. He obviously was a quarterback... His type is too valuable to be just blocking and making holes... Maybe a wide receive or running back. My money is on quarterback though..

JFrame
06-27-2012, 14:20
Lineman??? They don't win the games.. He obviously was a quarterback... His type is too valuable to be just blocking and making holes... Maybe a wide receive or running back. My money is on quarterback though..


...For both teams -- at the same time...! http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/artists/just_cuz/JC_sneaky.gif


.


.

Goaltender66
06-27-2012, 14:23
...For both teams -- at the same time...! http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/artists/just_cuz/JC_sneaky.gif


.


.

Along with being the referee...and the NCAA Commissioner!

JFrame
06-27-2012, 14:28
Along with being the referee...and the NCAA Commissioner!


NOW,you're talkin'!


http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/artists/just_cuz/JC_cheesy.gif


.

countrygun
06-27-2012, 14:41
Sure he did.

But as 17yo boys, we all do.

Doc, as a 17yo boy did you ever make a mistake that you wish you had a "do over" on?

I can think of a couple that I wish I had a "do over" on when I was 17yo.

Luckily I lived through mine and could learn from my mistakes.

Martin doesn't have that opportunity.

.


Nope, his mistake was fatal. It happens. Nature's way of reducing the recidevism rate.

Gunboat1
06-27-2012, 15:40
OMG - Winnie the lying troll is back.....and has told another whopper. Color me shocked.

series1811
06-27-2012, 15:45
Sure he did.

But as 17yo boys, we all do.

Doc, as a 17yo boy did you ever make a mistake that you wish you had a "do over" on?

I can think of a couple that I wish I had a "do over" on when I was 17yo.

Luckily I lived through mine and could learn from my mistakes.

Martin doesn't have that opportunity.

As for all the personal attacks.........

Bring 'em on. When all you can do is to attack me personally means you don't have any proof to back up your statements.

Me an ex-CIA guy?

Nope. Just a Disabled Combat Veteran. Spent 4 years fighting the Evil Commies in Central America. Got out and played 2 seasons of College Football the went back in for another 3 years fighting the "War on Drugs". Got out again. Worked for Uncle Sam as a Gov't Contractor through the US Dept of State working with the same group as a civilian that I was assigned to while on active duty.

During the "War on Drugs" we were exposed to large sums of cash and drugs and as a result of this exposure we had to routinely take drug test and polygraph test. Somewhere along the line someone decided that it was in the USA's best interest if we knew how to beat a polygraph test.

It's easy to do if you know how the test works based on heart rate, blood pressure, breathing, etc. Especially if you take a Valium a half hour before the test.

So, flame away all you want it doesn't bother me the lest little bit because I just consider the source that it's coming from.

Spyder

P.S. if anyone wants proof of my Disabled Veteran status all you have to do is ask for and I'll be glad to post proof that I'm a Disabled Veteran.

Where were you in the Drug Wars?

JFrame
06-27-2012, 15:49
OMG - Winnie the lying troll is back.....and has told another whopper. Color me shocked.


Ah...Winnnie -- that noted entrepreneur who was going to erect solar panels on his vast acreage in Ohio (or was it Pennsylvania?) for his energy needs, and farm out the residue to the surrounding area, thereby solving that region's energy problems...

Yet another gone and lamented screen-name... :whistling:

Maybe we should come up with a GTPI Baron Munchausen Award for past and current fantasists? :dunno:


.

panzer1
06-27-2012, 16:39
Nope, just the opposite.

I look at the facts, all the facts, then I decide.

I do not need Murdock, Rush, Beck or Sean to tell me what I need to believe in or agree with.

SpyderMaybe not,but a little help from big Al?

Lethaltxn
06-27-2012, 17:10
Nope, just the opposite.

I look at the facts, all the facts, then I decide.

I do not need Murdock, Rush, Beck or Sean to tell me what I need to believe in or agree with.

Spyder

I'm curious, what facts are you going off of?
I honestly would like to know.

panzer1
06-27-2012, 17:30
Sure he did.

But as 17yo boys, we all do.

Doc, as a 17yo boy did you ever make a mistake that you wish you had a "do over" on?

I can think of a couple that I wish I had a "do over" on when I was 17yo.

Luckily I lived through mine and could learn from my mistakes.

Martin doesn't have that opportunity.

As for all the personal attacks.........

Bring 'em on. When all you can do is to attack me personally means you don't have any proof to back up your statements.

Me an ex-CIA guy?

Nope. Just a Disabled Combat Veteran. Spent 4 years fighting the Evil Commies in Central America. Got out and played 2 seasons of College Football the went back in for another 3 years fighting the "War on Drugs". Got out again. Worked for Uncle Sam as a Gov't Contractor through the US Dept of State working with the same group as a civilian that I was assigned to while on active duty.

During the "War on Drugs" we were exposed to large sums of cash and drugs and as a result of this exposure we had to routinely take drug test and polygraph test. Somewhere along the line someone decided that it was in the USA's best interest if we knew how to beat a polygraph test.

It's easy to do if you know how the test works based on heart rate, blood pressure, breathing, etc. Especially if you take a Valium a half hour before the test.

So, flame away all you want it doesn't bother me the lest little bit because I just consider the source that it's coming from.

Spyder

P.S. if anyone wants proof of my Disabled Veteran status all you have to do is ask for and I'll be glad to post proof that I'm a Disabled Veteran.Yes true we all made mistakes at 17 years old,but trying to beat a man to death is not one of them!! And why did he do this? Because he got seen casing someone's house to rob later? Face it Trayvon Martin was a trug the Bad guy & G Zimmerman is the Good guy just trying to do the right thing & help stop crime! Calling 911. You can't try to beat a man to death just because you think he's following you. Well in till now & your black!

Kablam
06-27-2012, 18:00
Double aught spy I believe.

Lethaltxn
06-27-2012, 18:08
http://www.mightyheaton.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/fakespy_01_of_04.jpg

Cavalry Doc
06-28-2012, 04:24
Sure he did.

But as 17yo boys, we all do.

Doc, as a 17yo boy did you ever make a mistake that you wish you had a "do over" on?

I can think of a couple that I wish I had a "do over" on when I was 17yo.

Luckily I lived through mine and could learn from my mistakes.

Martin doesn't have that opportunity.



Actually no, I really don't have anything I did at 17 that I would go back and do over again. That might sound hard to believe but I have a couple of reasons. First, I'm pretty happy being me. I learned from those mistakes, and others learned about me through some of them. I take full responsibility for them. Second, I honestly have no clue how I convinced Mrs. Cavalry Doc to marry me. She's much better looking than I am, and I would not take the chance of changing anything before we met at 18 years of age, which as any geek can tell you could interupt the space time continuum, and things might not work out as well as they have. I would also not want to take the chance of not having my children. So honestly, no, I do not fantasize about going back to high school with a time machine.

At the age of 17, Martin would have been tried as an adult if he had killed Zimmerman. I'll agree that 17 year olds aren't the brightest candles in the box, but that is not an excuse. It certainly appears he made a fatal mistake. Take a walk through any large cemetery, there are a lot of kids that make fatal mistakes. That's the way it is.

I don't live in a fantasy world where people aren't responsible for their actions, or have access to time machines. Martin is responsible for his actions, and if Zimmerman's story is true, I have no sympathy for him. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Zimmerman is responsible for his actions. 12 people will decide if he acted within the law, or outside of it.

Reality, it's real. There are no do-overs in life.

Bren
06-28-2012, 05:02
P.S. if anyone wants proof of my Disabled Veteran status all you have to do is ask for and I'll be glad to post proof that I'm a Disabled Veteran.

OK, I'm asking.

Skyhook
06-28-2012, 05:12
OK, I'm asking.

:mememe:
:nailbiting:
:popcorn:

series1811
06-28-2012, 05:24
Double aught spy I believe.

No, I think we have gone well into triple aught territory. :supergrin:

Cavalry Doc
06-28-2012, 05:51
Double aught spy I believe.

Double oh zero is already taken by a certain claimed Trojan Horse delegate.

NDCent
06-28-2012, 06:58
As Jethro Bodine will attest, it's "double naught" spy. :cool:

series1811
06-28-2012, 07:14
As Jethro Bodine will attest, it's "double naught" spy. :cool:

I stand corrected. We definitely have us some triple "naught" stuff going on here. :supergrin:

whoflungdo
06-28-2012, 08:10
Sure he did.

But as 17yo boys, we all do.

Doc, as a 17yo boy did you ever make a mistake that you wish you had a "do over" on?

I can think of a couple that I wish I had a "do over" on when I was 17yo.

Luckily I lived through mine and could learn from my mistakes.

Martin doesn't have that opportunity.

As for all the personal attacks.........

Bring 'em on. When all you can do is to attack me personally means you don't have any proof to back up your statements.

Me an ex-CIA guy?

Nope. Just a Disabled Combat Veteran. Spent 4 years fighting the Evil Commies in Central America. Got out and played 2 seasons of College Football the went back in for another 3 years fighting the "War on Drugs". Got out again. Worked for Uncle Sam as a Gov't Contractor through the US Dept of State working with the same group as a civilian that I was assigned to while on active duty.

During the "War on Drugs" we were exposed to large sums of cash and drugs and as a result of this exposure we had to routinely take drug test and polygraph test. Somewhere along the line someone decided that it was in the USA's best interest if we knew how to beat a polygraph test.

It's easy to do if you know how the test works based on heart rate, blood pressure, breathing, etc. Especially if you take a Valium a half hour before the test.

So, flame away all you want it doesn't bother me the lest little bit because I just consider the source that it's coming from.

Spyder

P.S. if anyone wants proof of my Disabled Veteran status all you have to do is ask for and I'll be glad to post proof that I'm a Disabled Veteran.

So, um... how did you play college football if you were disabled? Because you either played disabled or went back and worked as a contractor with your same active duty unit disabled. Please enlighten us...

I sure hope you didn't kill or hurt anyone that was a young adult that just made a mistake, or didn't get a do over, or that wasn't able to live through his/her mistakes during your fighting of the Evil Commies or the War on Drugs. I hate for you to end up being a hypocrite...


Still waiting on answers to my questions...:popcorn:

FFR Spyder GT
06-28-2012, 11:03
Still waiting on answers to my questions...:popcorn:

Reread my post.

I did 4 years AD, got out. Played 2 seasons of football. Signed up for another 3 years.

I received my injuries the 2nd go around. I ended up having to quit as a contractor because of my injuries and hearing loss.

I've never injured an innocent person during the fight against the Evil Commies or during the "War on Drugs".

I'm not a hypocrit.

Here's a couple of pics....

2010 Dodge QuadCab w/ Hemi

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd248/stengun/1318942031.jpg

Pic of VA ID card showing Service Connected.



Pic of my house. You can see my Dodge QC behind my '96 T-Bird work car.

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd248/stengun/1333313313.jpg

Here's a pic of the back of my Dodge where it. Clearly shows my Disabled Veteran license plate.



When i catch a person in a lie I never believe anything they say after that unless I know it's the truth.

At the same time when someone makes a statement and can prove their statement then I normally believe anything they say after that unless I know it isnt true.

So, what more proof do you need?

Even though most of the members on GT, especially the PI section trolls, still live at home in the Mom's basement, some of us actually done a few things during our lifetime.

Spyder

JFrame
06-28-2012, 11:07
Wow -- this kind'a reminds me of a previous screen-name who was desperate to be acknowledged and validated by the forum members, and who wound up sending personal videos to a bunch of us via PMs...


.

series1811
06-28-2012, 11:35
You might be surprised sometimes at who you run into online. And, a lot of us have pretty good BS detectors when its in our lane.

But, I saw where Spyder said he worked. I worked in some of those same places, doing the same things he says he did. I'd love to hear more.

We should know some of the same people.

GWSHARK
06-28-2012, 11:48
Whelp... I guess he showed yall! :rofl::rofl:

Spyder... you are alright with me.

series1811
06-28-2012, 11:50
Whelp... I guess he showed yall! :rofl::rofl:

Spyder... you are alright with me.

You are still going through life without a clue, aren't you?

gwalchmai
06-28-2012, 11:52
Whelp... I guess he showed yall! :rofl::rofl:

Spyder... you are alright with me.Yeah, 'cause no one could fake something like that...

GWSHARK
06-28-2012, 11:54
Yeah, 'cause no one could fake something like that...

I knew it... yall want him to show the long form not the short form... :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

JFrame
06-28-2012, 11:55
Yeah, 'cause no one could fake something like that...


I'm gonna prove to everyone that I look just like a young Burt Lancaster...Excuse me for a second while I do a little Googling and a little Photobucketing...


.

GWSHARK
06-28-2012, 12:10
I'm gonna prove to everyone that I look just like a young Burt Lancaster...Excuse me for a second while I do a little Googling and a little Photobucketing...


.


Don't play games... if you still think the man is lying don't beat around bush.... call him a LIAR. :whistling:

JFrame
06-28-2012, 12:14
Don't play games... if you still think the man is lying don't beat around bush.... call him a LIAR. :whistling:


Get with the program, Shark -- I called him that a few days, maybe a week, ago.

Sheesh... :upeyes:


.

GWSHARK
06-28-2012, 12:16
Get with the program, Shark -- I called him that a few days, maybe a week, ago.

Sheesh... :upeyes:


.

Im talking about the being a disable veteran and the pics posted above... you alluded to not believing... but I want you to spell it out.

JFrame
06-28-2012, 12:27
Im talking about the being a disable veteran and the pics posted above... you alluded to not believing... but I want you to spell it out.

IMHO -- anybody who feels the need to post some scanned and photocopied images to give him the "bona fides" to validate whatever wild claims he's made has lost the credibility battle. We collectively have a pretty good BS meter here (with the accumulated knowledge and experiences of the forum members), and this guy surpassed that tolerance level some time ago -- always coming up with "I did this" or "I did that" to try and bolster any BS claim.

These claims by BS artists are always accompanied by either blatant or thinly-veiled allusions to some type of monetary/material wealth, to say, "See -- I am better than you," or "You'd better believe what I say 'cause I got stuff!"

He isn't the first BS artist to try and pass this ship off as validation. I would mention he-that-will-never-be-mentioned...But he can't be mentioned... :whistling:


.

Gundude
06-28-2012, 12:48
Typical GTPI MO:

"Show us the proof!"

"Ok, here"

"That proof is bogus! Anybody can fabricate that! How insecure are you that you feel the need to show us that?"


:yawn:

JFrame
06-28-2012, 12:50
Typical GTPI MO:

"Show us the proof!"

"Ok, here"

"That proof is bogus! Anybody can fabricate that! How insecure are you that you feel the need to show us that?"


:yawn:


Maybe that applies to others. I never asked for "proof."


.

GWSHARK
06-28-2012, 12:51
Typical GTPI MO:

"Show us the proof!"

"Ok, here"

"That proof is bogus! Anybody can fabricate that! How insecure are you that you feel the need to show us that?"


:yawn:

LOL... I thought I was the only one....

GWSHARK
06-28-2012, 12:52
Maybe that applies to others. I never asked for "proof."


.

Well calling someone a LIAR in my eyes... is a call for proof. :wavey:

JFrame
06-28-2012, 12:55
Well calling someone a LIAR in my eyes... is a call for proof. :wavey:

A virtual impossibility on the Internet -- so I disagree.

It is just a clear statement of conviction that one does not believe what another person is uttering.


.

Goaltender66
06-28-2012, 13:03
A virtual impossibility on the Internet -- so I disagree.

It is just a clear statement of conviction that one does not believe what another person is uttering.


.

Pretty much. Anyone can claim to be anything on the Internet. That's why this is kind of funny, because someone is committing the logical fallacy of appealing to authority (his) and on the Internet authority really can't be proven.

That's why I focus on the argument and not the claimed authority of the person relying on jpgs in lieu of logic. YMMV.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

gwalchmai
06-28-2012, 13:04
Anyone can claim to be anything on the interwebs. Credibility is earned by consistency and reason. Some of youse has it and some of youse don't.

whoflungdo
06-28-2012, 13:05
Reread my post.

I did 4 years AD, got out. Played 2 seasons of football. Signed up for another 3 years.

I received my injuries the 2nd go around. I ended up having to quit as a contractor because of my injuries and hearing loss.

I've never injured an innocent person during the fight against the Evil Commies or during the "War on Drugs".

I'm not a hypocrit.


Good... Now you and George Zimmerman have something in common.

I did read your original post and it wasn't clear. I still find it interesting that a governmental agency would hire you to do a job that you no longer could do because of injuries...


....... (Pictures edited out by Whoflungdo for bandwidth and breavity)..

When i catch a person in a lie I never believe anything they say after that unless I know it's the truth.

At the same time when someone makes a statement and can prove their statement then I normally believe anything they say after that unless I know it isnt true.

So, what more proof do you need?

I didn't ask for proof. Bren did. This is not the place to "prove" anything along the lines of what you are so eager to prove...


Even though most of the members on GT, especially the PI section trolls, still live at home in the Mom's basement, some of us actually done a few things during our lifetime.

Spyder

I would love to see your proof of this.. Nice Ad Hominem attack... I'm sure most can "prove" this isn't true just like you did...

Whelp... I guess he showed yall! :rofl::rofl:

Spyder... you are alright with me.

He sure did.. I'm so glad you now have an ally

Typical GTPI MO:

"Show us the proof!"

"Ok, here"

"That proof is bogus! Anybody can fabricate that! How insecure are you that you feel the need to show us that?"


:yawn:

Bren is the only one that asked for proof..I doubt Bren's request was more than wanting to give this guy enough rope to hang himself as most of the trolls eventually do around here.. Although most people's BS meter is off the charts here, most couldn't care less of his proof... It's the outrageous claims and the seemingly jumping up and down to show us that does him. Most people wouldn't care less what a group of people on the Internet thought or believed...

Maybe that applies to others. I never asked for "proof."

.

Exactly... I'm guessing if they repeat the lie long enough, they will believe it as well...

gwalchmai
06-28-2012, 13:05
:rofl:

whoflungdo
06-28-2012, 13:07
Pretty much. Anyone can claim to be anything on the Internet. That's why this is kind of funny, because someone is committing the logical fallacy of appealing to authority (his) and on the Internet authority really can't be proven.

That's why I focus on the argument and not the claimed authority of the person relying on jpgs in lieu of logic. YMMV.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


Ding, ding, ding... We have a winner...

JFrame
06-28-2012, 13:10
That's why I focus on the argument and not the claimed authority of the person relying on jpgs in lieu of logic. YMMV.


Exactly...And I find that leftists routinely fail on the former, which is why they so often fall back on the latter.


.

Gundude
06-28-2012, 13:11
Pretty much. Anyone can claim to be anything on the Internet. That's why this is kind of funny, because someone is committing the logical fallacy of appealing to authority (his) and on the Internet authority really can't be proven.

That's why I focus on the argument and not the claimed authority of the person relying on jpgs in lieu of logic. YMMV.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engineThat's why asking somebody to prove something about themselves over the Internet is kind of ridiculous.

Gundude
06-28-2012, 13:20
Good... Now you and George Zimmerman have something in common.

I did read your original post and it wasn't clear. I still find it interesting that a governmental agency would hire you to do a job that you no longer could do because of injuries...



I didn't ask for proof. Bren did. This is not the place to "prove" anything along the lines of what you are so eager to prove...



I would love to see your proof of this.. Nice Ad Hominem attack... I'm sure most can "prove" this isn't true just like you did...



He sure did.. I'm so glad you now have an ally



Bren is the only one that asked for proof..I doubt Bren's request was more than wanting to give this guy enough rope to hang himself as most of the trolls eventually do around here.. Although most people's BS meter is off the charts here, most couldn't care less of his proof... It's the outrageous claims and the seemingly jumping up and down to show us that does him. Most people wouldn't care less what a group of people on the Internet thought or believed...



Exactly... I'm guessing if they repeat the lie long enough, they will believe it as well...That post wasn't addressed to you or JFrame in particular. It is GTPI MO. You might've missed a little thread or two about Obama's birth certificate. Apparently the copy scanned and posted on the Internet wasn't enough for "several" people on here. I guess they expected him to mail a certified copy to everybody in the US or something. Same thing in this case. Asking for proof of somebody's disabled veteran status over the Internet is as riduculous as attempting to provide it. It's more disingenious though, because it's made with the explicit intent of mocking it when it arrives.

JFrame
06-28-2012, 13:23
That post wasn't addressed to you or JFrame in particular. It is GTPI MO. You might've missed a little thread or two about Obama's birth certificate. Apparently the copy scanned and posted on the Internet wasn't enough for "several" people on here. I guess they expected him to mail a certified copy to everybody in the US or something. Same thing in this case. Asking for proof of somebody's disabled veteran status over the Internet is as riduculous as attempting to provide it. It's more disingenious though, because it's made with the explicit intent of mocking it when it arrives.


To be fair -- we're not equating the credibility requirements of the president with some anonymous poster on the Internet, are we?


.

whoflungdo
06-28-2012, 13:25
P.S. if anyone wants proof of my Disabled Veteran status all you have to do is ask for and I'll be glad to post proof that I'm a Disabled Veteran.[/I]

That post wasn't addressed to you or JFrame in particular. It is GTPI MO. You might've missed a little thread or two about Obama's birth certificate. Apparently the copy scanned and posted on the Internet wasn't enough for "several" people on here. I guess they expected him to mail a certified copy to everybody in the US or something. Same thing in this case. Asking for proof of somebody's disabled veteran status over the Internet is as riduculous as attempting to provide it. It's more disingenious though, because it's made with the explicit intent of mocking it when it arrives.

Pssst... Gundude...

Take a look above.. I've quoted it for you.. Bren is the one that asked for proof. He hasn't mocked anything..

No one asked for the proof... Spyder threw out the "I'm a bad dude... If you don't believe me, I'll prove it to you" (my words of paraphrasing, not his..) Most everyone but him has agreed in this thread that that is something difficult if not impossible to prove over the Internet. That is why there is any mocking...

Gundude
06-28-2012, 13:26
To be fair -- we're not equating the credibility requirements of the president with some anonymous poster on the Internet, are we?


.No, we're talking about the fruitlessness of attempting to ask for, or provide proof of, anything about oneself over the Internet.

JFrame
06-28-2012, 13:26
No, we're talking about the fruitlessness of attempting to ask for, or provide proof of, anything about onesself over the Internet.


Okay.


.

Gundude
06-28-2012, 13:30
Okay.


.Which, going back to the title of this thread, appears to be way off topic. Oops.

Bren
06-28-2012, 13:32
Im talking about the being a disable veteran and the pics posted above... you alluded to not believing... but I want you to spell it out.

Not enough to call him a liar, but not enough to convince me, given the story.

The length of time in service, vs. what he claims to have been doing.

The reference to being a contractor, which I'm a little iffy about, in that context.

The claim that the government trained him to beat polygraphs.

I can maybe think of a way it's possible, but awfully unlikely.

JFrame
06-28-2012, 13:33
Which, going back to the title of this thread, appears to be way off topic. Oops.


Ha -- thread drift is a time-honored tradition... :supergrin:


.

concretefuzzynuts
06-28-2012, 13:44
I've taken numerous polygraph test and was taught by Uncle Sam how to beat them.

Once you're trained or you figure out how to beat them it's a piece of cake.

Nuthin' to it. That's why they're not admissible in court.

I took one years ago and answered every question truthfully, like name, age, DOB, etc., basically all the stuff used to establish your baseline and afterward the examiner said that I never truthfully answered a single question including my baseline responses.

It's a machine with a human operating it so it can be tricked.

http://i1076.photobucket.com/albums/w459/concretefuzzynuts/secret_agent_man-show.jpg

countrygun
06-28-2012, 13:54
Not enough to call him a liar, but not enough to convince me, given the story.

The length of time in service, vs. what he claims to have been doing.

The reference to being a contractor, which I'm a little iffy about, in that context.

The claim that the government trained him to beat polygraphs.

I can maybe think of a way it's possible, but awfully unlikely.



This is the part I'm sceptical of on two levels.

The Government depends of polygraphs at several levels and uses them, here and their, for various reasons. The thought that they would willy-nilly teach people to defeat them is, well, "dubious".

It is also quite resonable to believe that the Government DOES teach SOME people to defeat them for varous reasons. Of this I am fairly certain. HOWEVER, those people are rather carefully chosen for thier jobs or MOS as the case may be, and do not fit the psychological profile of someone who would draw undue interest to them self on an internet forum, nor put so much personal info out there as well. It, in some circles would be termed an "OpSec" violation at least.

Color me "doubtful".

JFrame
06-28-2012, 13:59
This is the part I'm sceptical of on two levels.

The Government depends of polygraphs at several levels and uses them, here and their, for various reasons. The thought that they would willy-nilly teach people to defeat them is, well, "dubious".

It is also quite resonable to believe that the Government DOES teach SOME people to defeat them for varous reasons. Of this I am fairly certain. HOWEVER, those people are rather carefully chosen for thier jobs or MOS as the case may be, and do not fit the psychological profile of someone who would draw undue interest to them self on an internet forum, nor put so much personal info out there as well. It, in some circles would be termed an "OpSec" violation at least.

Color me "doubtful".


That's a good point. I know people who have been there, done that, and got the T-shirts -- many, many times over. They are the most low-key people I know, and none of them are Internet loudmouths about their own experiences.


.

Lethaltxn
06-28-2012, 14:00
This is the part I'm sceptical of on two levels.

The Government depends of polygraphs at several levels and uses them, here and their, for various reasons. The thought that they would willy-nilly teach people to defeat them is, well, "dubious".

It is also quite resonable to believe that the Government DOES teach SOME people to defeat them for varous reasons. Of this I am fairly certain. HOWEVER, those people are rather carefully chosen for thier jobs or MOS as the case may be, and do not fit the psychological profile of someone who would draw undue interest to them self on an internet forum, nor put so much personal info out there as well. It, in some circles would be termed an "OpSec" violation at least.

Color me "doubtful".

Thank you.

Goaltender66
06-28-2012, 14:11
This is the part I'm sceptical of on two levels.

The Government depends of polygraphs at several levels and uses them, here and their, for various reasons. The thought that they would willy-nilly teach people to defeat them is, well, "dubious".

It is also quite resonable to believe that the Government DOES teach SOME people to defeat them for varous reasons. Of this I am fairly certain. HOWEVER, those people are rather carefully chosen for thier jobs or MOS as the case may be, and do not fit the psychological profile of someone who would draw undue interest to them self on an internet forum, nor put so much personal info out there as well. It, in some circles would be termed an "OpSec" violation at least.

Color me "doubtful".

And might as well bring this full circle to demonstrate how weak Spyder's argument is.

If it is ridiculously easy to beat a polygraph, training isn't necessary. But then if it's that easy, no one, including the US Gov, would be using them.

But then if beating the polygraph requires specialized training (indeed, as Spyder puts forth, the US Gov felt the need to train him because beating it was otherwise difficult), then where in Zimmerman's history would he have received such specialized training?

In other words, beating the polygraph is either easy enough for a civvie like Zimmerman to do it (in which case Spyder's representation of the specialized training is exaggerated...kind of like learning to chew gum) or its difficult enough to require specialized training in which case Zimmerman isn't the clueless civvie Spyder seems to think he is.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Lethaltxn
06-28-2012, 14:18
And might as well bring this full circle to demonstrate how weak Spyder's argument is.

If it is ridiculously easy to beat a polygraph, training isn't necessary. But then if it's that easy, no one, including the US Gov, would be using them.

But then if beating the polygraph requires specialized training (indeed, as Spyder puts forth, the US Gov felt the need to train him because beating it was otherwise difficult), then where in Zimmerman's history would he have received such specialized training?

In other words, beating the polygraph is either easy enough for a civvie like Zimmerman to do it (in which case Spyder's representation of the specialized training is exaggerated...kind of like learning to chew gum) or its difficult enough to require specialized training in which case Zimmerman isn't the clueless civvie Spyder seems to think he is.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
http://img.tapatalk.com/417c5e0a-bc29-0095.jpg

FFR Spyder GT
06-28-2012, 18:20
Deleted

JFrame
06-28-2012, 18:29
Good grief -- give it up, Spyder!

You're really starting to embarrass yourself.

Frankly, at this point, I don't care if you've been there, done that, got the T-shirt...I'm glad that the ones I know aren't the type that you purport to be (and, perhaps, should emulate).


.

whoflungdo
06-28-2012, 18:40
Good grief -- give it up, Spyder!

You're really starting to embarrass yourself.

Frankly, at this point, I don't care if you've been there, done that, got the T-shirt...I'm glad that the ones I know aren't the type that you purport to be (and, perhaps, should emulate).


.

Jframe I have to disagree with you again...he didn't just start it...


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

JFrame
06-28-2012, 18:41
Jframe I have to disagree with you again...he didn't just start it...


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

:rofl:

Thanks for pointing out my error... :embarassed:


.

countrygun
06-28-2012, 18:50
I have to ask the general group around here, with all his pictures and bragging about things he knows on the internet, exactly how deep do you think the kimchee would be for ole' Spyder if he capped someone under any circumstances?

After all, nobody has coughed up ANYTHING like Spyder's posts coming from Zimmerman and look at the trouble he's in.


If I knew how to beat a polygraph I wouldn't brag about that on the internet. A real operator would know that is a secret best kept to oneself.

whoflungdo
06-28-2012, 19:02
I have to ask the general group around here, with all his pictures and bragging about things he knows on the internet, exactly how deep do you think the kimchee would be for ole' Spyder if he capped someone under any circumstances?

After all, nobody has coughed up ANYTHING like Spyder's posts coming from Zimmerman and look at the trouble he's in.


If I knew how to beat a polygraph I wouldn't brag about that on the internet. A real operator would know that is a secret best kept to oneself.

I'm guessing since the Stolen Valor Act was deemed unconstitutional, not much...


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

gwalchmai
06-28-2012, 20:11
I've known a few disabled vets. I've never seen one brag about it and show off their tag.

Lethaltxn
06-28-2012, 21:33
Actually, nothing he's posted thus far really validate anything more than he's a disabled vet.

College ball pics? Maybe some pics of him in hot zones with his team?

I don't know, and quite frankly anyone that brags that much is usually full of something.

FFR Spyder GT
06-29-2012, 09:07
Good grief -- give it up, Spyder!

You're really starting to embarrass yourself.

Frankly, at this point, I don't care if you've been there, done that, got the T-shirt...I'm glad that the ones I know aren't the type that you purport to be (and, perhaps, should emulate).


.

JFrame,

You called me a liar and proved that you were wrong and instead of being a man and admitting that you were wrong, you're still wanting to whining about BS that you cannot prove.


Sure I can post pics of myself from college and pics of myself half way around the World but in your eyes what would that prove?

Nothing, so what's the point?

Go back to your Mom's basement and everything will be ok. You have already made a fool of yourself.

Spyder

JFrame
06-29-2012, 09:33
JFrame,

You called me a liar and proved that you were wrong and instead of being a man and admitting that you were wrong, you're still wanting to whining about BS that you cannot prove.


Sure I can post pics of myself from college and pics of myself half way around the World but in your eyes what would that prove?

Nothing, so what's the point?

Go back to your Mom's basement and everything will be ok. You have already made a fool of yourself.

Spyder


You must be confusing me with someone else.

I don't want you to post ANYTHING anymore...

Sheesh... :upeyes:


.

DOC44
06-29-2012, 09:39
http://rlv.zcache.com/00_spy_school_tshirt-p235172646196725606b8nzv_400.jpg

Doc44

whoflungdo
06-29-2012, 09:58
JFrame,

You called me a liar and proved that you were wrong ...



You must be confusing me with someone else.

I don't want you to post ANYTHING anymore...

Sheesh... :upeyes:


.

He's not the only one confused. I really wanna know how you proved you were wrong JFrame...:whistling:

GWSHARK
06-29-2012, 10:11
Dang... what did I miss? :cool:

JFrame
06-29-2012, 10:31
Dang... what did I miss? :cool:


A whole lotta nothin', Shark -- kind'a like a "Seinfeld" episode... :supergrin:


.

JFrame
06-29-2012, 10:37
He's not the only one confused. I really wanna know how you proved you were wrong JFrame...:whistling:


Well -- as in everything else that person has said -- evidently everything he says makes it so...It makes me not even want to get into the time I had to fight Evander Holyfield for the last hush puppy in the basket. A real melee ensued, but I prevailed after a brutal 10 minutes by applying my patented sleeper hold (taught to me by Chuck Norris when I was but a tad...).


.

TBO
06-29-2012, 12:38
George Zimmerman bail hearing ends, ruling pending

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/29/12474108-george-zimmerman-bail-hearing-ends-ruling-pending?lite

KCCAD
06-29-2012, 15:40
George Zimmerman bail hearing ends, ruling pending

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/29/12474108-george-zimmerman-bail-hearing-ends-ruling-pending?lite

I watched part of it today on streaming video. The judge didn't look like he was convinced it was a good idea to trust Zman and let him out.

DOC44
06-29-2012, 16:00
I watched part of it today on streaming video. The judge didn't look like he was convinced it was a good idea to trust Zman and let him out.

http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2012/0427-george-zimmerman-defense-fund/12398342-1-eng-US/0427-george-zimmerman-defense-fund_full_600.jpg

Looks like he is seeking devine inspiration.

Doc44

Skyhook
06-29-2012, 16:25
You must be confusing me with someone else.

I don't want you to post ANYTHING anymore...

Sheesh... :upeyes:


.

One of the funniest things posted here to date. Has to be!
:rofl:

OldCurlyWolf
06-29-2012, 16:29
Doesn't mean a thing.

Most habitual liars can even lie about their own name, date of birth, etc while standing on their hear and get a "NDI".

That's why they are not admissible in court.

No legal standing, the prosecution can't mention it, unless the defense brings it up.

But, judiciously used, it can be a good investigative tool.

:cool:

KCCAD
06-29-2012, 17:52
http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2012/0427-george-zimmerman-defense-fund/12398342-1-eng-US/0427-george-zimmerman-defense-fund_full_600.jpg

Looks like he is seeking devine inspiration.

Doc44

:rofl:

I'll have to admit he was patient with the defense while they were trying to make their case. There were a few delays while they were trying to get info together to submit.

TBO
07-01-2012, 22:22
Trayvon Martin killed 'because of his own doing', George Zimmerman's attorney says

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/trayvon-martin-killed-because-his-own-doing-george-zimmermans-attorney-says

janice6
07-01-2012, 22:39
Self defense from vicious thugs will not go unpunished. The court of the big 'O' speaks.

BS

Gundude
07-01-2012, 22:48
The court of the big 'O' speaks.
What on Earth does that mean? :dunno:

Cavalry Doc
07-02-2012, 04:43
Trayvon Martin killed 'because of his own doing', George Zimmerman's attorney says

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/trayvon-martin-killed-because-his-own-doing-george-zimmermans-attorney-says

If Zimmerman's story is true, that is a reasonable statement. I'd have waited till closing arguments to state that though.

Bren
07-02-2012, 04:53
If Zimmerman's story is true, that is a reasonable statement. I'd have waited till closing arguments to state that though.

Since I'm just on the internet, I feel justified in saying Zimmerman's story is true, because it has not been disputed with a single piece of evidence that has been mentioned in the press, unless I missed something.

TBO
07-05-2012, 10:48
Zimmerman granted $1 million bond

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/05/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

DOC44
07-05-2012, 13:39
Judge must have a crystal ball to state these conclusions.


In a scathing ruling, Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester branded Zimmerman a schemer and said he believed he had been getting ready to flee the country with a second passport he had stashed away.

“Circumstances indicate that the Defendant was preparing to flee to avoid prosecution, but such plans were thwarted,” Lester wrote.

“It is entirely reasonable for this court to find that, but for the requirement that he be placed on electronic monitoring, the Defendant and his wife would have fled the United States with at least $130,000 of other people's money.”


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/george-zimmerman-bail-set-1m-trayvon-martin-case-article-1.1108348#ixzz1zmKtanoN


Doc44

Cavalry Doc
07-05-2012, 13:49
Judge must have a crystal ball to state these conclusions.





Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/george-zimmerman-bail-set-1m-trayvon-martin-case-article-1.1108348#ixzz1zmKtanoN


Doc44



If that is true, why grant bail at all?

I've been saying for a long time now, there may not be any good guys in this story.

Should still be fun to watch. :popcorn:

Gundude
07-05-2012, 17:28
I commend Zimmerman's entrepreneurship with respect to his speedy setup of that paypal account to fleece dumb people out of their money based on emotional reactions to sensational news stories. Likewise to that guy selling Trayvon Martin range targets. It's all about jumping on the opportunity while the iron's hot, making the quick buck off of the rubes, and getting out just as quickly.

Unfortunately for Zimmerman, he doesn't have the brains to back up his entrepreneurial zeal.

DOC44
07-05-2012, 19:40
I commend Zimmerman's entrepreneurship with respect to his speedy setup of that paypal account to fleece dumb people out of their money based on emotional reactions to sensational news stories. Likewise to that guy selling Trayvon Martin range targets. It's all about jumping on the opportunity while the iron's hot, making the quick buck off of the rubes, and getting out just as quickly.

Unfortunately for Zimmerman, he doesn't have the brains to back up his entrepreneurial zeal.

Did you get your official Trayvon hoodie?

http://www.polyvore.com/cgi/img-thing?.out=jpg&size=l&tid=53815134

Doc44

countrygun
07-05-2012, 20:00
If that is true, why grant bail at all?

I've been saying for a long time now, there may not be any good guys in this story.

Should still be fun to watch. :popcorn:


since i have seen you to be a wise individual, I take it you are not limiting this to just Martin and Zimmerman?

Cavalry Doc
07-05-2012, 20:18
since i have seen you to be a wise individual, I take it you are not limiting this to just Martin and Zimmerman?

Yeah, If I believed a guy had a stashed passport and was getting ready to flee the country with 130 grand, why on earth would I grant bail at all?



As far as zimmerman goes, I've not made up my mind once about him. I'm waiting to hear the full story. Now we are just waiting to see if there was one bad guy or two involved in that shooting.

countrygun
07-05-2012, 20:42
Yeah, If I believed a guy had a stashed passport and was getting ready to flee the country with 130 grand, why on earth would I grant bail at all?



As far as zimmerman goes, I've not made up my mind once about him. I'm waiting to hear the full story. Now we are just waiting to see if there was one bad guy or two involved in that shooting.


I still question WHY they didn't check on that account and WHY they let him out of jail, the first time, if they had those recordings in their hot little hands?

I do not for one minute believe, based on my experience, that they didn't listen to them before they bail hearing, after all it is the job of the prosecutor to present all of the evidence that contraindicates bail being allowed. What was the point in letting the horse out and then screaming "The barn door is open"?

In a perfect world nothing about the bail and subsequent issues would ever be heard by the jury before the trial in the killing of Martin. They are going to have a heck of a time finding anyone who hasn't at this point.

Cavalry Doc
07-05-2012, 21:17
The whole thing is a pretty stinky mess so far.

TBO
07-05-2012, 21:20
I still question WHY they didn't check on that account and WHY they let him out of jail, the first time, if they had those recordings in their hot little hands?

I do not for one minute believe, based on my experience, that they didn't listen to them before they bail hearing, after all it is the job of the prosecutor to present all of the evidence that contraindicates bail being allowed. What was the point in letting the horse out and then screaming "The barn door is open"?

In a perfect world nothing about the bail and subsequent issues would ever be heard by the jury before the trial in the killing of Martin. They are going to have a heck of a time finding anyone who hasn't at this point.

We've been over this before. Your "experience", is actually speculation.

Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2

countrygun
07-05-2012, 21:29
We've been over this before. Your "experience", is actually speculation.

Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2

Sure just like I am going to speculate that they search prisoners before they put them in a cell. Purely speculation too:upeyes:

TBO
07-05-2012, 22:07
Crafting a Strawman isn't going to help your position, again.

series1811
07-06-2012, 07:59
I guess I have read enough news accounts of criminal cases and trials I have been involved in, and barely recognized because the facts were so wrong as reported, to figure I will just wait and see what the evidence really is, before I decide what happened between Zimmerman and Martin.

Guss
07-06-2012, 11:13
I still question WHY they didn't check on that account and WHY they let him out of jail, the first time, if they had those recordings in their hot little hands?

...
Everybody following the case on the Internet knew that Zimmerman was collecting money. Why didn't the prosecutor know at the first bond hearing? Why didn't she say something? She probably DID know at that time, but wanted to set this up to harass Zimmerman further.

Guss
07-06-2012, 11:15
I ...

Unfortunately for Zimmerman, he doesn't have the brains to back up his entrepreneurial zeal.
Fortunately for Zimmerman, self-defense rules protect all innocent people, no matter how smart they may or may not be.

TBO
07-09-2012, 10:12
George Zimmerman staying at safe house

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/08/12628548-george-zimmerman-staying-at-safe-house?lite

Gundude
07-09-2012, 10:41
Fortunately for Zimmerman, self-defense rules protect all innocent people, no matter how smart they may or may not be.Not true at all. The self-defense rules are full of conditions which lessen or nullify the defense altogether in the case where the person claiming it tooks steps to encourage and/or escalate the fight (in other words, where the person claiming it was being stupid).

DOC44
07-09-2012, 12:48
http://www.nodeju.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/trayvon-martin-7-11-NDJ.jpg

Haven't seen this pix of Trayvon before.

Doc44

Gunboat1
07-09-2012, 19:41
http://www.nodeju.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/trayvon-martin-7-11-NDJ.jpg

Haven't seen this pix of Trayvon before.

Doc44

"...but, but, but.....he was just a CHILD!" :upeyes:

JFrame
07-09-2012, 19:45
"...but, but, but.....he was just a CHILD!" :upeyes:


Man -- what child is that? Baby Huey??? :shocked:


.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 00:37
Why would we have seen that pic? What's it supposed to show?

The M.E. measured him and weighed him and he was 5'11, 158 pounds. Not really an imposing physique.

We can barely see his face in the picture.

What would've been the point of showing it?

DOC44
07-10-2012, 00:47
Why would we have seen that pic? What's it supposed to show?

The M.E. measured him and weighed him and he was 5'11, 158 pounds. Not really an imposing physique.

We can barely see his face in the picture.

What would've been the point of showing it?

Why did we see this picture?

What was the point of showing this one?

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/sites/default/files/2012/03/trayvon_martin.jpg
















































http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/4f7099ea69beddf21800003d/not-trayvon-martin.jpg

Can you see his face now?

Doc44

countrygun
07-10-2012, 01:05
Why would we have seen that pic? What's it supposed to show?

The M.E. measured him and weighed him and he 5'11, 158 pounds. Not really an imposing physique.

We can barely see his face in the picture.

What would've been the point of showing it?


http://i1231.photobucket.com/albums/ee518/CountryG/anothertoast.png

Gundude
07-10-2012, 01:05
Can you see his face now?

Doc44Not really.

You're kinda rambling. Why don't you get to your point? What revelations do those pictures bring us?

Any comment on this guy?:
http://i981.photobucket.com/albums/ae291/Streetmaster45/wwwsurvivalistboardscom2012-7-719-46-47.png
If he got shot tomorrow by an Obama fan, would the Obama fan be justified for defending himself against such a thug?

DOC44
07-10-2012, 01:35
Not really.

You're kinda rambling. Why don't you get to your point? What revelations do those pictures bring us?

Any comment on this guy?:
http://i981.photobucket.com/albums/ae291/Streetmaster45/wwwsurvivalistboardscom2012-7-719-46-47.png
If he got shot tomorrow by an Obama fan, would the Obama fan be justified for defending himself against such a thug?

ah.............. I can't see his face at all.

Doc44

Gundude
07-10-2012, 01:37
ah.............. I can't see his face at all.

Doc44Yeah, kinda seems dumb to post that picture at all, since it has no relevance to anything, huh?

Lethaltxn
07-10-2012, 05:42
Yeah, kinda seems dumb to post that picture at all, since it has no relevance to anything, huh?

And what relevance does a 5 year old, out of date picture have?
Seems kinda dumb in putting it out there and not showing something current, huh?

countrygun
07-10-2012, 06:17
Yeah, kinda seems dumb to post that picture at all, since it has no relevance to anything, huh?

The 5 year-old picture of Martin wasn't "news" it was propoganda. A picture of him shortly before he was shot is "News"

It's just that simple.

Gunboat1
07-10-2012, 06:18
Why would we have seen that pic? What's it supposed to show?

The M.E. measured him and weighed him and he was 5'11, 158 pounds. Not really an imposing physique.

We can barely see his face in the picture.

What would've been the point of showing it?

News flash: in a fist fight, height and arm length (reach) = significant advantage. It's clear that short, chubby Zimmerman was facing something of a disparity of force when being assaulted by Trayvon. This picture helps illustrate that the "poor, defenseless, innocent child" portrayed by the media was something else entirely, leading to a much stronger likelihood of Zimmerman's innocence. The other pic Doc posted speaks to attitude and behavior on Trayvon's part - also fitting the pattern of thuggish behavior cited by Zimmerman in his testimony.

If you can't see that these pics help Zimmerman's case, and illustrate the media bias arrayed against him from the start, it's because you are demonstrating your own strong bias.

I predict that Zimmerman walks - and justice will have been served, all around.

Goaltender66
07-10-2012, 06:18
The M.E. measured him and weighed him and he was 5'11, 158 pounds. Not really an imposing physique.

Kind of like this guy, 5'10 1/2" and about 145 lbs:

http://assets.sbnation.com/imported_assets/96539/oscar_de_la_hoya_5149419.jpg

But then, Oscar de la Hoya could still kick both of our butts at the same time.

http://boxingmemories.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/oscar_de_-la_hoya.jpg

Point being, "imposing physique" means very little when the guy is on top of you pounding your head into the pavement and telling you that you're going to die.

Gunboat1
07-10-2012, 06:18
sorry, double tap

Chris Brines
07-10-2012, 06:40
Trayvon Martin could rise from the dead and tell the world Zimmerman shot him in self defense, and people would still be calling Zimmerman a racist murderer. An eyewitness could come forth with video footage of the entire incident, showing Zimmerman clearly pulling the trigger as a last resort, to save his own life, and people would still be calling him a racist murderer. I'm not saying this is how it happened, I'm just saying that no matter what, even if the SD claim was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, it still wouldn't matter, they'd still be calling him a racist, and they'd still be calling him a "child killer".

The truth does not matter here, it is an opportunity to use Zimmerman as a "whipping boy" and turn this case against all white gun owning Americans, as it has been since the day Al Sharpton stuck his nose in it. Now they want to repeal SYG, just wait till a black man gets killed by some white supremacist and they'll be doing anything they can to get it reinstated, should they succeed in getting it repealed (highly unlikely).

I have friends of all different races, nationalities, religions and everything else. I live in one of the most diverse cities on the planet. Yet I still get this feeling from blacks that they feel they are not a part of this country, like they are separate from everyone else, and that the Bill of Rights does not apply to them as it does the rest of us. That's how I feel when I see them speaking out against the Bill of Rights, and the 2nd Amendment. They make it seem as if this amendment were there for white people only, and not for them too. They make it seem like concealed carry permits, and SYG laws, are not there for them either.

Sad, it really is, when we finally make some progress and ordinary, law abiding citizens can find A LITTLE comfort knowing they have the right to defend themselves, should they get attacked or threatened by a criminal. But now they are doing everything they can to turn it right back to the way it's been my entire life, and that is law abiding citizens living in fear, completely avoiding certain sections of entire cities, or cities in their entirety, just because they know they will be robbed or worse. Scared to death at the thought of having a gun pointed at their chest by a crazed junkie, and being shot to death even after complying and handing over everything in their pockets. Or whatever other tragic scenario has become a reality in one of our major cities.

I knew a guy back in Louisiana who wanted to go to New Orleans for Mardi Gras. Well he went to N.O. perfectly fine, and came home paralyzed. He and his fiance at the time were walking down a street in downtown and a couple thugs came from out of nowhere with baseball bats and beat him half to death, left him for dead on the street. They ended up breaking his neck (if I'm not mistaken) or something like that, either way, he never walked again. His fiance sat there and watched in horror while this happened, completely defenseless, partially due to the fact that it was illegal (or highly discouraged, and CC was not legal) to carry a gun for self protection.

At first I was a little apprehensive about open carry, now I support it 100%, and I also take the stance that every state in the country, should have gun laws like Arizona and Alaska, where there is no requirement to have a permit to carry YOUR OWN GUN.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 10:08
News flash: in a fist fight, height and arm length (reach) = significant advantage. It's clear that short, chubby Zimmerman was facing something of a disparity of force when being assaulted by Trayvon.That's quite a stretch. In a fight, weight is also a significant advantage. You can't just ignore it. So it's not a disparity of force. The height differential isn't so great that the weight differential doesn't come into play as well.

This picture helps illustrate that the "poor, defenseless, innocent child" portrayed by the media was something else entirely, leading to a much stronger likelihood of Zimmerman's innocence. The other pic Doc posted speaks to attitude and behavior on Trayvon's part - also fitting the pattern of thuggish behavior cited by Zimmerman in his testimony. So the guy flipping off the Obama bus also fits a pattern of thuggish behavior? Or is it the exposed boxers that's the giveaway?

If you can't see that these pics help Zimmerman's case, and illustrate the media bias arrayed against him from the start, it's because you are demonstrating your own strong bias.Obviously the media is biased, as are all the Zimmerman defenders posting meaningless pictures of Trayvon in an equally transparent attempt to have people read way more into a picture than reality suggests.

DOC44
07-10-2012, 10:12
That's quite a stretch. In a fight, weight is also a significant advantage. You can't just ignore it. So it's not a disparity of force. The height differential isn't so great that the weight differential doesn't come into play as well.

So the guy flipping off the Obama bus also fits a pattern of thuggish behavior? Or is it the exposed boxers that's the giveaway?

Obviously the media is biased, as are all the Zimmerman defenders posting meaningless pictures of Trayvon in an equally transparent attempt to have people read way more into a picture than reality suggests.

You are either really stupid or think GTPI posters are.:tongueout:

Doc44

countrygun
07-10-2012, 10:16
Obviously the media is biased, as are all the Zimmerman defenders posting meaningless pictures of Trayvon in an equally transparent attempt to have people read way more into a picture than reality suggests.


So then what is your gripe about a different picture being posted? How many media outlets have you complained to about their bias?

I am not quite sure there is a transparent effort to read anything into the picture that wasn't there. Just showing him accurately, more so than media sources, at the time of his death.

I don't get it unless you think it is "OK" for the media to be biased and that no one shpuld present another side to the story the media tells,

dpadams6
07-10-2012, 10:18
Yeah, kinda seems dumb to post that picture at all, since it has no relevance to anything, huh?

You can not seriously think those two photos are identical?

Gundude
07-10-2012, 10:18
Kind of like this guy, 5'10 1/2" and about 145 lbs:

http://assets.sbnation.com/imported_assets/96539/oscar_de_la_hoya_5149419.jpg

But then, Oscar de la Hoya could still kick both of our butts at the same time.

http://boxingmemories.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/oscar_de_-la_hoya.jpg

Point being, "imposing physique" means very little when the guy is on top of you pounding your head into the pavement and telling you that you're going to die.Well, if the picture Doc posted of shirtless Trayvon shows anything, it's that he's no Oscar De La Hoya.

Funny how when Zimmerman supporters thought Trayvon was 6'3 and over 200 pounds, it was all about the big guy beating up on the little guy. His size was important then. Now that Trayvon isn't so big, it's about how the little guy can be so strong. If Trayvon was the stocky one and Zimmerman the lanky one, it'd be all about how Trayvon's low center of gravity and weight advantage presented a disparity of force for poor Zimmerman.

Those who say the press is biased by cherry-picking the facts they want to hear should take a look in the mirror.

countrygun
07-10-2012, 10:18
You are either really stupid or think GTPI posters are.:tongueout:

Doc44

I wish you had gotten that posted before I posted. I would have added "no kidding" to my post

Gundude
07-10-2012, 10:20
You can not seriously think those two photos are identical?No, they're not identical. They're both equally irrelevant to anything that happens to their subject after they are taken.

countrygun
07-10-2012, 10:21
Those who say the press is biased by cherry-picking the facts they want to hear should take a look in the mirror.

I did, I saw a guy looking back who thought the press is largely worthless scum and who would have shot Trayvon under the same circumstances.

what was your point?

Gundude
07-10-2012, 10:23
You are either really stupid or think GTPI posters are.:tongueout:

Doc44Add the word "some" in the right spot in that sentence, and it becomes a true statement, yes.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 10:24
I did, I saw a guy looking back who thought the press is largely worthless scum and who would have shot Trayvon under the same circumstances.

what was your point?How do you know the circumstances? Did you learn them from the scummy press, or the "good" press?

Guss
07-10-2012, 10:41
About one of those pictures:
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/martin.asp

Gundude
07-10-2012, 10:48
About one of those pictures:
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/martin.asp

Twitchy.com subsequently posted a correction, stating:

We made a mistake. The photo on the right is not of the Trayvon Martin who was shot by Zimmerman. We apologize to our readers and to the Martin family.

Any chance Doc will do likewise?

DOC44
07-10-2012, 10:59
You are either really stupid or think GTPI posters are.:tongueout:

Doc44

Add the word "some" in the right spot in that sentence, and it becomes a true statement, yes.

You are either some really stupid or think GTPI posters are.:tongueout:

Glad we can agree on something.:wavey:

Doc44

countrygun
07-10-2012, 11:01
How do you know the circumstances? Did you learn them from the scummy press, or the "good" press?


From Zimmermans statements, and injuries. The fact that the DA with original jurisdiction felt there was no case is good enough for me. The fact that it is only being persued by a high level politician masquerading as a public official and pandering to the media and the public circus created, doesn't change that.

Goaltender66
07-10-2012, 11:10
Well, if the picture Doc posted of shirtless Trayvon shows anything, it's that he's no Oscar De La Hoya.
Looking at Oscar de la Hoya in his suit, you can't really tell that he's built like Oscar de la Hoya either.

Once again, the point being that an "imposing physique" isn't really the QED I think you want it to be.

Funny how when Zimmerman supporters thought Trayvon was 6'3 and over 200 pounds, it was all about the big guy beating up on the little guy. His size was important then. Now that Trayvon isn't so big, it's about how the little guy can be so strong. If Trayvon was the stocky one and Zimmerman the lanky one, it'd be all about how Trayvon's low center of gravity and weight advantage presented a disparity of force for poor Zimmerman.

Those who say the press is biased by cherry-picking the facts they want to hear should take a look in the mirror.

That is, I think, you adding in your confirmation bias and reading into things what you want them to say. It's always been about the guy defending himself from an attacker and the misleading photos the press ran with in its attempt to create a narrative.

Saying Martin is 5'11 and 158 lbs doesn't really say much. However, if you want to get into the details, that Martin seemed to have been whupping Zimmerman enough to result in the injuries we've seen seems to prove that Martin wasn't the non-imposing weakling created by the media.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 11:40
Looking at Oscar de la Hoya in his suit, you can't really tell that he's built like Oscar de la Hoya either.

Once again, the point being that an "imposing physique" isn't really the QED I think you want it to be.



That is, I think, you adding in your confirmation bias and reading into things what you want them to say. It's always been about the guy defending himself from an attacker and the misleading photos the press ran with in its attempt to create a narrative.

Saying Martin is 5'11 and 158 lbs doesn't really say much. However, if you want to get into the details, that Martin seemed to have been whupping Zimmerman enough to result in the injuries we've seen seems to prove that Martin wasn't the non-imposing weakling created by the media.Just because the press created a narrative, doesn't mean the opposite of what they say has to be true.

It seems very apparent Martin was on top of Zimmerman punching him. What's not at all apparent is how they got there, and when Martin became aware of the gun.

Zimmerman's credibility isn't great. The whole paypal thing notwithstanding, there's the statement he made about leaving his car just to go see what address he was at. When you look at the position of Trayvon's body, it was in a walkway behind the houses. Zimmerman started out in a car on the street in front of the houses. You don't walk away from a street into a walking path behind houses to check an address. He was more likely trying to locate Martin again.

I don't give any credibility to Zimmerman's account of what happened. He's demonstrated that he will try to get away with whatever he thinks he can get away with. Yes, he was getting beat, but that's not an absolute defense against murder or manslaughter.

Justified use of deadly force comes with a fair number of conditions attached, even in Florida. Strip away all the press shenanigans and looking at just the raw evidence we have access to, this isn't a cut and dried case in favor of Zimmerman. Maybe he'll be acquitted, and maybe he won't, I won't lose sleep either way.

What I know with reasonable certainty is that he made his own bed, and now he has to lie in it. This isn't the story of somebody who was minding his own business and got attacked. This is the story of a guy who made some bad assumptions and stuck his nose too far into somebody else's own business. At least he's alive to reflect on his mistakes.

countrygun
07-10-2012, 12:18
What I know with reasonable certainty is that he made his own bed, and now he has to lie in it. This isn't the story of somebody who was minding his own business and got attacked. This is the story of a guy who made some bad assumptions and stuck his nose too far into somebody else's own business. At least he's alive to reflect on his mistakes.


That is a matter of nothing but OPINION not legal fact.

Many citizens have done pretty much the same thing that Zimmerman did with no ill consequences, and sometimes criminals have been caught as a result. In this case, for whatever reason, Martin attacked Zimmerman. I base this on the facet that, according to the released autopsy info, besides a bullet hole, the only damage to Martin were the scrapes on his knuckles from striking Zimmerman.

Unless of couurse you would like to make the case that Zimmerman attacked Martin by slamming his face into Martin's fist as hard as he could.

Many find that Zimmerman did nothing LEGALLY wrong.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 12:48
That is a matter of nothing but OPINION not legal fact.

Many citizens have done pretty much the same thing that Zimmerman did with no ill consequences, and sometimes criminals have been caught as a result. In this case, for whatever reason, Martin attacked Zimmerman. I base this on the facet that, according to the released autopsy info, besides a bullet hole, the only damage to Martin were the scrapes on his knuckles from striking Zimmerman.

Unless of couurse you would like to make the case that Zimmerman attacked Martin by slamming his face into Martin's fist as hard as he could.

Many find that Zimmerman did nothing LEGALLY wrong.You can do nothing LEGALLY wrong and still get in trouble with the law. Due process is slow and expensive, and determining you did nothing LEGALLY wrong could take a while and cost a lot. You can avoid that by not doing anything STUPID. Whether legally justified or not, what Zimmerman did was stupid. If he insisted on carrying out his neighborhood watch duties with a gun, it was his responsibility to ensure he did it safely for everybody concerned. By stupidly and needlessly increasing the likelihood of confrontation, he shirked that responsibility, and he's paying a price for it. The fact that he's not in jail while he awaits the outcome of his due process is a testament to the fairness of the justice system, a far cry from the system "out to get him" that many would have us believe.

He will get his day in court, and if he stops doing stupid things he will be free until that day, and possibly after it. That's how the system works.

dpadams6
07-10-2012, 13:02
[quote=Gundude;19181208]No, they're not identical. They're both equally irrelevant to anything that happens to their subject after they are taken.[/quote
Double post

dpadams6
07-10-2012, 13:05
No, they're not identical. They're both equally irrelevant to anything that happens to their subject after they are taken.

You didn't get an idea the type of life treyvon lived or possibly his character OR LACK OF?. Pictures speak a 1000 words and in his case, volumes. There 's a reason Z was not arrested immediately. HE DIDNT BREAK THE LAW. Gonna be great when a jury finds him not guilty.

gwalchmai
07-10-2012, 13:07
I say it's Zim's word against Trayvon's.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 13:08
You didn't get an idea the type of life treyvon lived or possibly his character OR LACK OF?. Pictures speak a 1000 words and in his case, volumes.It doesn't, in this case, because that picture isn't even of him. An error which Doc44 must certainly realize by now, as he's participated in this thread after that error was brought to light, but seems unwilling to correct.

countrygun
07-10-2012, 13:33
You can do nothing LEGALLY wrong and still get in trouble with the law. Due process is slow and expensive, and determining you did nothing LEGALLY wrong could take a while and cost a lot. You can avoid that by not doing anything STUPID. Whether legally justified or not, what Zimmerman did was stupid. If he insisted on carrying out his neighborhood watch duties with a gun, it was his responsibility to ensure he did it safely for everybody concerned.

In the first place, you probably wouldn't like my neck of the woods.

Zimmerman was "carrying safely", he didn't shoot Martin "accidentally". It seemed it worked well, as intended, for Zimmermans safety, or doesn't that count in your world?


By stupidly and needlessly increasing the likelihood of confrontation, he shirked that responsibility, and he's paying a price for it.

Where do we draw the line that creates 'Needless"? Is it written down somewhere? Is paying attention to something you think is suspicious "needless"? Was he acting stupidly to even pay attention? Just where do we have this "Magic line"? In you opinion? It seems that we have laws to decide that, (kind of what they are for) and I have seen nothing showing Zimmerman broke the law.

The fact that he's not in jail while he awaits the outcome of his due process is a testament to the fairness of the justice system, a far cry from the system "out to get him" that many would have us believe.

OH C'mon, that is above all the most useless of your arguments. The "Legal System" examined the facts and didn't charge him. The "Political System" took over and went after him. IF, IF the original DA was so incompetent that he overlooked any evidence then why isn't he be run through the wringer, after all, who knows what other henious things he has done?

He will get his day in court, and if he stops doing stupid things he will be free until that day, and possibly after it. That's how the system works.

I do agree with your conclusion but I am afraid your standards of "stupid" and "needless", are civil terms and not legal. As I said, you wouldn't like it around here. Too many of the good neighbors are "stupid and needless".

But we don't have a high enough crime rate to excite folks. I wonder if there is a connection?

Gundude
07-10-2012, 13:37
It seems that we have laws to decide that, (kind of what they are for) and I have seen nothing showing Zimmerman broke the law.
And we have courts to decide that (kind of what they are for).

So what's the problem?

countrygun
07-10-2012, 14:04
And we have courts to decide that (kind of what they are for).

So what's the problem?

Just your putting forth you opinions of zimmermans choices as if that has any bearing on the legal issues.

Well, that and the fact that you said

"I don't give any credibility to Zimmerman's account of what happened. He's demonstrated that he will try to get away with whatever he thinks he can get away with. Yes, he was getting beat, but that's not an absolute defense against murder or manslaughter."

While perhaps there are limitations, it seems clear that both of the eventual combatants had the opportunity to either report being followed by a suspicious person, or that they were following a suspicious person, only one of them took the legal course and phoned the Police.

All of the physical evidence points clearly to Martin, again ignoring the legal option and crossing the legal line by assaulting Zimmerman.

I think it is a dangerous slope to condemn perfectly legal actions because someone else chose to make a bad decision and illegally respond to them.

Again, the case was looked at once and the DA passed on charging. Any further prosecution has nothing to do with "justice", it is merely a corruption of the system.

Second guessing Zimmermans actions at this point is all but justifying the legal farce taking place. It is no longer about Martin it is about a system that is being used for political gains and about some rather questionable actions by the new prosecutor.

Skyhook
07-10-2012, 14:14
Gundude says; "I don't give any credibility to Zimmerman's account of what happened. He's demonstrated that he will try to get away with whatever he thinks he can get away with. Yes, he was getting beat, but that's not an absolute defense against murder or manslaughter."

"I don't give any credibility---- yada..." as if it was YOURS to give.
Why does this sound like the whiny rant of someone suffering from a thwarted man-crush?:upeyes:

Anyhow, leave the weighing of evidence to those less emotionally involved... that would result in some semblance of justice.

Just sayin' dude.

Chris Brines
07-10-2012, 15:25
Not to get involved in a futile debate, because no matter what anybody thinks, says, or feels, nobody (not even the Almighty Barack Hussein Obama himself) can prove George Zimmerman MURDERED Trayvon Martin (as opposed to shot him in self defense).

See, I took this class back in grade school once, and I might not remember everything I was taught, but I do remember very clearly, being taught, that in the United States of America, one must be presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. I kinda just assumed that everyone already knew that, but these days, I'm doubtful.

So vigorously posting as much "Anti Zimmerman" rhetoric on the internet as possible, will still not make a F of a difference on whether or not he is convicted of murder. It will come down to factual evidence, as it should, not public opinion.

Personally, if I was a neighborhood watch person, and I saw someone who I thought was "casing houses" for either present or future burglaries, I would (or at least would HAVE), asked them what they were doing. (Just a little background on myself, I once saw a guy doing exactly what GZ claimed TM was doing. He was white. Turned out he did in fact burglarize someone's apartment that day. I should have called the cops, I didn't, but I sure will next time). If they started beating me up and banging my head, my skull (the only thing protecting my BRAIN), into CONCRETE, I'd probably have felt compelled to defend myself as well.

I've never been one to assume guilt or innocence in this case, and have since day one said, "wait till all the facts are presented". Like anyone else with a hint of rational and logical thinking. But let me be clear here....if George Zimmerman's version of events were to be discovered 100% true, I say he is NOT GUILTY.

And although polygraphs are in-admissable in court, it still doesn't help all these people claiming they KNOW he is lying, does it?

DOC44
07-10-2012, 15:42
It doesn't, in this case, because that picture isn't even of him. An error which Doc44 must certainly realize by now, as he's participated in this thread after that error was brought to light, but seems unwilling to correct.

http://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/trayvon-twitter-acct1.jpg



Read about media bias here:
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/03/28/trayvon-martin-the-latest-media-narrative-continues-to-crumble-under-the-weight-of-lies-image-of-trayvon-the-troubled-teen-worsens/

Doc44

Chris Brines
07-10-2012, 15:49
I'll be honest the pictures of Trayvon mean nothing to me. If they were pictures of him holding a gun, holding drugs, or flashing gang signs, I'd probably feel differently. But pics of Trayvon giving "the finger", or even putting gold teeth in his mouth, are just a kid being a kid, that's all I see there. So you would think people wouldn't waste their time digging up ANY pics of Trayvon (damn, I feel like I know this kid, calling him by first name only now...it's time for this case to be put to rest!!) in his last year or so of life.

But the reason everyone feels the need to post pics of him being a "not so innocent" young man, is to counteract the liberal media's "tender innocent child" portrayal, and rightfully so, because it is inaccurate and completely unfair to the accused and the general public.

countrygun
07-10-2012, 15:53
I've never been one to assume guilt or innocence in this case, and have since day one said, "wait till all the facts are presented". Like anyone else with a hint of rational and logical thinking. But let me be clear here....if George Zimmerman's version of events were to be discovered 100% true, I say he is NOT GUILTY.

And although polygraphs are in-admissable in court, it still doesn't help all these people claiming they KNOW he is lying, does it?

I wouldn't set a burden on Zimmerman to prove 100% of his story, it is up to the prosecution to disprove it. By that I mean with evidence not insinuation or supposition or speculation. If they have to depend on those things they have no case in the first place.

The polygraph results are probably the most telling thing, thus far, when it comes to the validity of the internet experts. From far, far away, not having been there, they put out their "visions" of what happened, with absolutely nothing to support them, and yet they ignore the fact that Zimmerman passed a polygraph. Internet psychics have so much credibility:upeyes:

DOC44
07-10-2012, 15:55
.........
But the reason everyone feels the need to post pics of him being a "not so innocent" young man, is to counteract the liberal media's "tender innocent child" portrayal, and rightfully so, because it is inaccurate and completely unfair to the accused and the general public.


Agree

Doc44

JFrame
07-10-2012, 16:14
I wouldn't set a burden on Zimmerman to prove 100% of his story, it is up to the prosecution to disprove it. By that I mean with evidence not insinuation or supposition or speculation. If they have to depend on those things they have no case in the first place.


Good point -- that's an important distinction.


.

Chris Brines
07-10-2012, 16:46
I wouldn't set a burden on Zimmerman to prove 100% of his story, it is up to the prosecution to disprove it.

Actually you're right. They've been ranting and raving, so long, and so loudly about it, that I almost forgot that is how it is supposed to go. Actually I didn't "forget", because I had just finished typing it, I just misworded my statement. But what I really meant was, "if the facts showed me TODAY, his claims are 100% true". Know what I was thinking earlier? I was thinking about the legions of liberals in general, and the tactics they use to try and "prove" their points.

They know that the claims they make about everything (in general, not necessarily, but not excluding, the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case) are unfounded and have either little or ZERO factual evidence to back up what they are saying. Obviously this case is no exeption. Neither was them chanting "Yes We Can" in the middle of Chicago on Obama's inauguaration day. Yes We Can what? Bankrupt America. Well "Yes, You Can". Anyway, or more notably, "Well George Bush this, and George Bush that, hate this, racist that", when they know they've lost an argument.

A trend I've noticed in liberals, is that when they want something to be true, or exist, SO badly, but they know for a fact that rationality and reasoning will not let that happen, they start chanting. Or should I say, "ranting". Kinda like those ranting, "Justice for Trayvon". They know if they get enough ignorant people, to rant "Justice for Trayvon" loudly and persistently enough, they will gain a following. Does that mean it has any more credibility? No. But that many people chanting "Justice for Trayvon", literally drowns out the voices of those trying to look at this case with a fraction of reason and logic.

And that is pretty much the liberal strategy behind everything. Get enough people to talk so loud, and we can express and "assume" validity, for whatever nonsense rhetoric we want, because the voice of reason is drowned out completely.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 17:24
Gundude says; "I don't give any credibility to Zimmerman's account of what happened. He's demonstrated that he will try to get away with whatever he thinks he can get away with. Yes, he was getting beat, but that's not an absolute defense against murder or manslaughter."

"I don't give any credibility---- yada..." as if it was YOURS to give.
Why does this sound like the whiny rant of someone suffering from a thwarted man-crush?:upeyes:

Anyhow, leave the weighing of evidence to those less emotionally involved... that would result in some semblance of justice.

Just sayin' dude.Like a court of law, for instance?

Who is ultimately going to decide? A court of law. Not me. So what's the problem?

BTW, you seem to be missing the point of what a discussion forum actually is. Chillax dude.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 17:27
Just your putting forth you opinions of zimmermans choices as if that has any bearing on the legal issues. Last I checked this was GTPI, not any entity which has any bearing on legal issues anywhere. What's the problem?

Gundude
07-10-2012, 17:34
I'll be honest the pictures of Trayvon mean nothing to me. If they were pictures of him holding a gun, holding drugs, or flashing gang signs, I'd probably feel differently. But pics of Trayvon giving "the finger", or even putting gold teeth in his mouth, are just a kid being a kid, that's all I see there.Boys will be boys.

http://i50.tinypic.com/20f2fo.jpg

Gundude
07-10-2012, 17:38
http://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/trayvon-twitter-acct1.jpg
Doc44Not looking so thuggish in this (real) one, is he? Kinda presidential, actually.

I notice you haven't rescinded the fake one yet.

Chris Brines
07-10-2012, 17:39
Boys will be boys.

http://i50.tinypic.com/20f2fo.jpg

LMAO! That's funny:rofl::rofl:

Just don't take what I said out of context, those pictures of Trayvon, are there for a reason.

countrygun
07-10-2012, 17:48
Boys will be boys.

http://i50.tinypic.com/20f2fo.jpg


WOW!!!!:wow:

I had no idea he knew you that well!!

Gundude
07-10-2012, 17:52
LMAO! That's funny:rofl::rofl:

Just don't take what I said out of context, those pictures of Trayvon, are there for a reason.I agree 100% the media has an agenda, and they distort just about everything. While the older one where he was much younger may have been excusable when they first caught the story and material was scarce, it's inexcusable to keep posting it with ongoing stories.

However, those on the right have a particularly annoying habit of decrying tactics while using the exact same tactics. It belies any notion that they are "better than that", and instead suggests they're only interested in furthering their own agendas.

Other pictures of TM should be shown, but people shouldn't start out with the assumption that he's a thug and then try to find or fabricate pictures to prove it.

Chris Brines
07-10-2012, 17:56
Other pictures of TM should be shown, but people shouldn't start out with the assumption that he's a thug and then try to find or fabricate pictures to prove it.

Of course, and any other time, I'd probably be criticizing people for doing so. But since it is done in defense to the entire liberal media trying to label an innocent (until proven guilty) man, a "child murderer", I consider it excusable. But in principle, trying to distort facts is wrong no matter who's doing it.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 18:06
Of course, and any other time, I'd probably be criticizing people for doing so. But since it is done in defense to the entire liberal media trying to label an innocent (until proven guilty) man, a "child murderer", I consider it excusable. But in principle, trying to distort facts is wrong no matter who's doing it.There's always an excuse:

"You have to fight fire with fire"

"I don't believe in unilateral disarmament"

"It's for the children"

etc.

But in the end, all it's doing is admitting that the tactic works and therefore should be used when the ends justify the means.

Chris Brines
07-10-2012, 18:18
But in the end, all it's doing is admitting that the tactic works and therefore should be used when the ends justify the means.

Well, when the end is the entire left wing legion of Americans presumptively labeling a man a "child killer", one of the worst things you can ever be, making him a marked man for life, no matter what the outcome of his trial is, I wouldn't say it is justified.

Even if he is proven guilty, presumptive judgement before all the facts have been presented, is not the way we want to go in this country, and anyone who disagrees, would be contradicting themselves the minute something happens when the tables are turned.

Such as a black man being charged with murder for defending himself against a white supremacist who fully intended to kill him, when he had a "duty to retreat", for example. Those same people protesting against SYG laws today, would eat their words if that were the case, and that is the problem. It's hypocrisy, either way you look at it.

Would showing pics of the white supremacist before he shaved his head and covered himself in tattoos, with a big warm smile on his face, and the accused black man getting drunk and holding up a sign that said "F the world", be justified?

Have you ever stopped for a minute and thought, "You know, although I find it highly unlikely, WHAT IF, George Zimmerman IS telling the truth? What if he really took the shot because it was his only way of stopping his head from being smashed into the concrete (something that could easily kill or paralyze)".

I know I have stopped and thought to myself, "What if he did hunt that kid down and kill him?". I can say I have looked at this case objectively, and my conclusion is I don't have enough facts to make a judgement on whether or not a man should be labeled a child murderer, that is what the trial will be for.

Gundude
07-10-2012, 18:53
Well, when the end is the entire left wing legion of Americans presumptively labeling a man a "child killer", one of the worst things you can ever be, making him a marked man for life, no matter what the outcome of his trial is, I wouldn't say it is justified.

Even if he is proven guilty, presumptive judgement before all the facts have been presented, is not the way we want to go in this country, and anyone who disagrees, would be contradicting themselves the minute something happens when the tables are turned.

Such as a black man being charged with murder for defending himself against a white supremacist who fully intended to kill him, when he had a "duty to retreat", for example. Those same people protesting against SYG laws today, would eat their words if that were the case, and that is the problem. It's hypocrisy, either way you look at it.

Would showing pics of the white supremacist before he shaved his head and covered himself in tattoos, with a big warm smile on his face, and the accused black man getting drunk and holding up a sign that said "F the world", be justified?The problem with your analogy is unlike your White Supremacist, Trayvon Martin didn't look or act like a violent or racist person, so your "fully inteded to kill him" assumption has to be looked at a little closer, which is what the justice system is doing now. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. It's not the end of the world that it needs to be scrutinized.

If your nonviolent, unarmed teenage kid got killed by a guy who had previously been arrested for acts of violence, whose dad happened to be a retired judge, and the authorities didn't seem too interested in scrutinizing it any further, you'd probably do a little lobbying yourself to cast a closer look at it.

Chris Brines
07-11-2012, 04:10
The problem with your analogy is unlike your White Supremacist, Trayvon Martin didn't look or act like a violent or racist person, so your "fully inteded to kill him" assumption has to be looked at a little closer, which is what the justice system is doing now. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. It's not the end of the world that it needs to be scrutinized.

If your nonviolent, unarmed teenage kid got killed by a guy who had previously been arrested for acts of violence, whose dad happened to be a retired judge, and the authorities didn't seem too interested in scrutinizing it any further, you'd probably do a little lobbying yourself to cast a closer look at it.

I wasn't comparing TM to a murderous white supremacist. I was only using that hypothetical example to put in perspective the double standards going on with this case. Of course that example was a little extreme, but it was necessary only to try and make you look at it from the other side, just for a minute, without diverting the topic (at least that was my intention).

It was only a response to your comment that saying the ends of making GZ out to be a "child killer" justified the means of portraying TM as a "tender innocent child, who wouldn't hurt a fly", which we know isn't true considering he (seemingly) punched a bus driver 2 days before his death, (again, boys will be boys, that is pretty common for teenage boys). And to present a hypothetical scenario in which all these SAME PEOPLE who are out in the street protesting SYG laws, would feel differently if the tables were turned.

In no way was I suggesting TM was a violent thug with murderous intentions. I was using a completely separate, hypothetical example, to note a double standard. I even thought about typing that into the previous message, but I decided to wait and see if you took that approach, which to be honest, I knew you would.

Chris Brines
07-11-2012, 04:26
Nobody once said Trayvon deserved to be shot. He was a rough and tumble teenage boy, like most teenage boys are. He probably liked a good fight now and again, like many young men do at that age. Of course it's not a "good" thing, but does it mean he deserved to die? Of course not. That is not what the debate is about. Nobody with a conscience ever said his death wasn't a tragedy, it is a tragedy, it should have never happened, and I even agree with you, that maybe GZ MAY HAVE overstepped his reach as a neighborhood watch person.

But that's something yet to be proven, and the man should at least, at MINIMUM, be given the respect of being presumed innocent, until PROVEN guilty in a court of law, beyond a reasonable doubt. Once it is PROVEN to me that he had ill intentions, intentions of hurting or killing someone, I'll be screaming "justice for Trayvon" just like everyone else, because I would never want someone like that walking the same streets as me either.

Cavalry Doc
07-11-2012, 04:42
The problem with your analogy is unlike your White Supremacist, Trayvon Martin didn't look or act like a violent or racist person, so your "fully inteded to kill him" assumption has to be looked at a little closer, which is what the justice system is doing now. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. It's not the end of the world that it needs to be scrutinized.

If your nonviolent, unarmed teenage kid got killed by a guy who had previously been arrested for acts of violence, whose dad happened to be a retired judge, and the authorities didn't seem too interested in scrutinizing it any further, you'd probably do a little lobbying yourself to cast a closer look at it.



And my stock in "Brain spackle" is sure to be doing well due to posts like this.

Are you really sure he was nonviolent? Do you know if Martin was justified in using potentially deadly force, if he did of course? How do you know Martin didn't act like a violent criminal? Are you sure he was a nonviolent criminal?

So, how old is the kid you are subconsciously equivocating with Martin? What relation?

Chris Brines
07-11-2012, 07:34
And my stock in "Brain spackle" is sure to be doing well due to posts like this.

Are you really sure he was nonviolent? Do you know if Martin was justified in using potentially deadly force, if he did of course? How do you know Martin didn't act like a violent criminal? Are you sure he was a nonviolent criminal?

So, how old is the kid you are subconsciously equivocating with Martin? What relation?

That too. So many assumptions going on with this case. Notice how the ones who are calling GZ a murderer scold the rest of us? As if we are saying, "he's innocent, we know it!". When in reality, all we are saying is, "we don't have all the facts". Then they say something like, "the 911 operator ORDERED him to stop following the kid, and he kept following him!". When in reality, nobody knows for sure if he kept following him or not, and according to his story, he DID in fact stop following him, then lost sight of him and was suckerpunched when attacked from behind. A claim that regardless how anyone feels, what they "think", they have no basis to call him a liar when there is no proof he is lying.

Even aside from that, did the 911 operator really have any authority to tell GZ where he can and can't walk on that street? Nope. Although I would never put my support behind someone I truly thought murdered someone, regardless of their skin color (as has been assumed by many race baiters over the course of this ongoing saga), but I honestly can't say that I've been shown any evidence of wrongdoing on the part of GZ.

DOC44
07-11-2012, 07:49
http://stylistakt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/trayvon-martin-girlfriend-larger.jpg

How tall was Trayvon.... reports range from 5'8" to 6'2".... they say the medical report indicates he was 5'11" tall.

How tall is the young lady in the pix? How far off the floor is the middle door hinge or door stop to the right of them?

Doc44

Gundude
07-11-2012, 13:40
Nobody once said Trayvon deserved to be shot. He was a rough and tumble teenage boy, like most teenage boys are. He probably liked a good fight now and again, like many young men do at that age. Of course it's not a "good" thing, but does it mean he deserved to die? Of course not. That is not what the debate is about. Nobody with a conscience ever said his death wasn't a tragedy, it is a tragedy, it should have never happened, and I even agree with you, that maybe GZ MAY HAVE overstepped his reach as a neighborhood watch person.

But that's something yet to be proven, and the man should at least, at MINIMUM, be given the respect of being presumed innocent, until PROVEN guilty in a court of law, beyond a reasonable doubt. Once it is PROVEN to me that he had ill intentions, intentions of hurting or killing someone, I'll be screaming "justice for Trayvon" just like everyone else, because I would never want someone like that walking the same streets as me either.I think we agree more than we disagree. I concede that Martin MAY HAVE initiated an excessive act of violence against Zimmerman.

Nowhere did I ever suggest Zimmerman should be thrown in jail without a fair trial. I think it's fair that he was granted bail, twice. I certainly don't deny the media is being irresponsible in their reporting.

What I take issue with is:

The overreaching attempts to portray Martin as a thug who had it coming, when there is nothing at all to suggest that is the case. Posting pictures of people who aren't even him as long as they look like thugs, accusations of violent criminal behavior based on nothing but tweets, that sort of thing.
The whining about how Zimmerman's being railroaded, as if he's a poor victim. Whatever happened to personal responsibility for your actions? If his actions are found to be legally justified, fine, but they were still questionable enough, and with bad enough consequences, that a fair trial is justified to determine their legality.

Gundude
07-11-2012, 13:59
http://stylistakt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/trayvon-martin-girlfriend-larger.jpg

How tall was Trayvon.... reports range from 5'8" to 6'2".... they say the medical report indicates he was 5'11" tall.

How tall is the young lady in the pix? How far off the floor is the middle door hinge or door stop to the right of them?

Doc44Really? Now you're disputing the accuracy of one of the simplest measurements in an official autopsy, in deference to a photograph showing him next to a person of unknown height, taken (obviously lobsidedly) with a camera with a lens of unknown focal length?

What lengths will you go to to continue deluding yourself?

Are you refusing to retract that original photo you posted of some thug-wannabe who wasn't Martin because you still secretly believe it was him, and the person who originally retracted that assertion was threatened into doing so by Jesse Jackson? :tinfoil:

countrygun
07-11-2012, 14:08
The whining about how Zimmerman's being railroaded, as if he's a poor victim. Whatever happened to personal responsibility for your actions? If his actions are found to be legally justified, fine, but they were still questionable enough, and with bad enough consequences, that a fair trial is justified to determine their legality.


His actions WERE considered "justified" by a District Attorney once and THAT is how the system is supposed to work.

He is being put through this "extra" prosecution due to politics. He has never been put in front of a Grand Jury, by the first District Attorney because the facts were too obvious to bother with, the second time because the "Special Prosecutor" wants to convict him or, at least have as high a publicity drawing trial as is possible and hold the stage as long as possible. A Grand Jury would likely kick this case out and "No Bill" and this prosecutor knows that as did the original prosecutor.

Tell me there haven't been any other killings comitted in Florida since Martin Died? Is the "Special Prosecutor all over them, getting "justice"?

The system worked as it was designed to in the original jurisdiction, Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton didn't like the result so they called for a "Do-Over"

Tell me, how is the NOT a "Railroading"?

There have been lots of killings across this Country, since Martin died. Where is all the coverage of those? Where are Al and Jessie ? Where is your concern? This is Theater not Justice and he is being railroaded

DOC44
07-11-2012, 14:09
Really? Now you're disputing the accuracy of one of the simplest measurements in an official autopsy, in deference to a photograph showing him next to a person of unknown height, taken (obviously lobsidedly) with a camera with a lens of unknown focal length?

What lengths will you go to to continue deluding yourself?

Are you refusing to retract that original photo you posted of some thug-wannabe who wasn't Martin because you still secretly believe it was him, and the person who originally retracted that assertion was threatened into doing so by Jesse Jackson? :tinfoil:

:supergrin:

Gundude
07-11-2012, 14:23
His actions WERE considered "justified" by a District Attorney once and THAT is how the system is supposed to work.

He is being put through this "extra" prosecution due to politics. He has never been put in front of a Grand Jury, by the first District Attorney because the facts were too obvious to bother with, the second time because the "Special Prosecutor" wants to convict him or, at least have as high a publicity drawing trial as is possible and hold the stage as long as possible. A Grand Jury would likely kick this case out and "No Bill" and this prosecutor knows that as did the original prosecutor.

Tell me there haven't been any other killings comitted in Florida since Martin Died? Is the "Special Prosecutor all over them, getting "justice"?

The system worked as it was designed to in the original jurisdiction, Jessie Jackson and Al Sharppton didn't like the result so they called for a "Do-Over"

Tell me, how is the NOT a "Railroading"?Jessie and Al didn't swarm in on their own. They were called by grieving parents who were concerned justice wasn't being done. Granted, summoning those two goons in search of justice is a sad irony, but grieving parents, especially ones with a lawyer, aren't necessarily in a state of mind to make sound decisions.

Secondly, the DA isn't a god, and his decisions can be overruled, as we obviously saw in this case. You can call that politics if you want, but it's part of the same system.

DOC44
07-11-2012, 14:52
Jessie and Al didn't swarm in on their own. They were called by grieving parents who were concerned justice wasn't being done. Granted, summoning those two goons in search of justice is a sad irony, but grieving parents, especially ones with a lawyer, aren't necessarily in a state of mind to make sound decisions.

Secondly, the DA isn't a god, and his decisions can be overruled, as we obviously saw in this case. You can call that politics if you want, but it's part of the same system.

http://pablochiste.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/forrest_gump_303722x.jpg

Doc44

FFR Spyder GT
07-11-2012, 15:00
The problem with your analogy is unlike your White Supremacist, Trayvon Martin didn't look or act like a violent or racist person, so your "fully inteded to kill him" assumption has to be looked at a little closer, which is what the justice system is doing now. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. It's not the end of the world that it needs to be scrutinized.

If your nonviolent, unarmed teenage kid got killed by a guy who had previously been arrested for acts of violence, whose dad happened to be a retired judge, and the authorities didn't seem too interested in scrutinizing it any further, you'd probably do a little lobbying yourself to cast a closer look at it.

+1.

One thing that all the "T-Dawg haters" are forgetting is that George was on first name bases with Sanford PD's Police Chief and his father knows the Seminole County PA.

So, don't you think personal friends and family friends "might" have been a little bias?

countrygun
07-11-2012, 16:14
Jessie and Al didn't swarm in on their own. They were called by grieving parents who were concerned justice wasn't being done. Granted, summoning those two goons in search of justice is a sad irony, but grieving parents, especially ones with a lawyer, aren't necessarily in a state of mind to make sound decisions.

Secondly, the DA isn't a god, and his decisions can be overruled, as we obviously saw in this case. You can call that politics if you want, but it's part of the same system.


And the "Special Prosecutor", at a news conference, saying "I am going to get justice for Trayvon Martin"

is the sign of exactly what? A fair investigation of the facts? Hardly. A pre-determination? Certainly. Before the investigation was complete, without letting a Grand Jury look at the case, it was already decided there would be a trial.

"Justice"? In a pig's arse.

None of the "Get Zimmerman" crowd can explain "why is there not as much money, time, and Special Prosecutors brought in to investigate every single homicide that has occurred in Florida since Martin died?"

Quit even trying to stretch this as a normal occurance in a homicide case.

Chris Brines
07-12-2012, 08:35
I've come to the conclusion in this case, that the reason the "Get Zimmerman" crowd is SOOO angry about this incident, is because they know deep in their minds that there is not enough factual evidence to convict Zimmerman. So they think ranting "Justice fa Trayvon" loudly enough, will get a conviction. The fact that it's gotten an indictment is sad enough, but the fact that Attorney General Eric Holder has decided to pursue for federal hate crime charges, is even more sad. Because being the "good lawyer" he is, he should know that this is a lost cause from the get go.

Unless of course, he plans on contorting the justice system to whatever way he wants it, just to get a conviction in this one case. It'll be interesting to see how Holder handles a case, when the shoe is on the other foot. If God Forbid he is still in office next year. That thought in itself makes me want to barf on my computer screen. I hate that guy, seriously. I hate Obama too. I don't care what anyone calls me a "racist" it is my 1st Amendment right to say whatever I want, about whoever I want, and Obama, Holder, and Clinton, are a disease infecting this country, and need to be treated aggressively on November 2nd.

This whole trend of basically trying to do whatever underhanded things they can, to tweak the processes of government unjustly in their favor, and NOT EVEN TRYING TO HIDE IT, (Executive Order this, Executive Order that), is just crossing the line. They have been allowed to go entirely too far with all of this, and this is the only reason Zimmerman is being crucified like he is today. And because TM looks like Obama's "son".

Gundude
07-12-2012, 09:24
And the "Special Prosecutor", at a news conference, saying "I am going to get justice for Trayvon Martin"

is the sign of exactly what? A fair investigation of the facts? Hardly. A pre-determination? Certainly. Before the investigation was complete, without letting a Grand Jury look at the case, it was already decided there would be a trial.

"Justice"? In a pig's arse.

None of the "Get Zimmerman" crowd can explain "why is there not as much money, time, and Special Prosecutors brought in to investigate every single homicide that has occurred in Florida since Martin died?"

Quit even trying to stretch this as a normal occurance in a homicide case.It's obviously not a normal homicide case, because of the claim of self defense by an armed person against an apparently non-dangerous unarmed person who was minding his own business at the time he was targeted. It warrants extra scrutiny. Maybe it will come out that Martin was dangerous beyond his looks and size, but that doesn't mean that applying the scrutiny to reach that conclusion is a railroading.

In the vast majority of homicides that occurred in Florida since Martin died, they either haven't captured their killer yet, the killer is sitting in jail awaiting due process, or the killer has already pled guilty and is serving his sentence. In spite of what you see on TV, most homicides aren't very nuanced.

Gunboat1
07-12-2012, 09:50
It's obviously not a normal homicide case, because of the claim of self defense by an armed person against an apparently non-dangerous unarmed person who was minding his own business at the time he was targeted. It warrants extra scrutiny. Maybe it will come out that Martin was dangerous beyond his looks and size, but that doesn't mean that applying the scrutiny to reach that conclusion is a railroading.

In the vast majority of homicides that occurred in Florida since Martin died, they either haven't captured their killer yet, the killer is sitting in jail awaiting due process, or the killer has already pled guilty and is serving his sentence. In spite of what you see on TV, most homicides aren't very nuanced.

"Apparently non-dangerous"..????

See Zimmerman's injuries! You are simply trying to obscure the facts.

All the evidence supports Zimmerman's testimony. Thuglet Trayvon discovered the potential repercussions of going through life thinking you can assault anyone you think may possibly have "disssed" you.

I predict Zimmerman walks when a jury gets to see the facts in court.

Gundude
07-12-2012, 10:00
"Apparently non-dangerous"..????

See Zimmerman's injuries! You are simply trying to obscure the facts.

All the evidence supports Zimmerman's testimony. Thuglet Trayvon discovered the potential repercussions of going through life thinking you can assault anyone you think may possibly have "disssed" you.Yeah, I see your respect for evidence is unassailable. :upeyes:

Since you have "all the evidence", I sure would like to see it.

Guss
07-12-2012, 10:07
If somebody grabbing for your gun doesn't justify use of self-defense, then what the hell does?

Gundude
07-12-2012, 10:12
If somebody grabbing for your gun doesn't justify use of self-defense, then what the hell does?Somebody grabbing for your gun would also give you reason to murder them.

Whether it's self-defense or not would depend on what your intentions were with that gun.

If I was robbing a 7-11 and the clerk grabbed for my gun and I shot him, it's not self-defense. No, it's not the same as what happened in this case, but it's a clearer way to refute your blanket statement.

Your intent and your actions leading up to that point have to be taken into account.

countrygun
07-12-2012, 10:17
It's obviously not a normal homicide case, because of the claim of self defense by an armed person against an apparently non-dangerous unarmed person who was minding his own business at the time he was targeted.

Making up your own version now, well I guess you are right, no reality can possibly match your imagination. Yes beating Zimmerman certainly was the act of a non-dangerous individual alright,:upeyes:

"TARGETED"

Ma'am I didn't recognize you without the hat.

http://i1231.photobucket.com/albums/ee518/CountryG/likeadog.png


Don't you mean "Hunted down like a dog in the street"?

It warrants extra scrutiny. Maybe it will come out that Martin was dangerous beyond his looks and size, but that doesn't mean that applying the scrutiny to reach that conclusion is a railroading.

In the vast majority of homicides that occurred in Florida since Martin died, they either haven't captured their killer yet, the killer is sitting in jail awaiting due process, or the killer has already pled guilty and is serving his sentence. In spite of what you see on TV, most homicides aren't very nuanced.


Again, since you have a hard time with nuances, how mant homicides does this special prosecutor run around sticking her nose into?

Gundude
07-12-2012, 10:37
"TARGETED"

Ma'am I didn't recognize you without the hat.
Let me try again then:

It's obviously not a normal homicide case, because of the claim of self defense by an armed person against an apparently non-dangerous unarmed person who was minding his own business at the time the defendant saw him and made him the object of his intentions.

It's wordy, more vague and sounds a little gay, but anything to protect your delicate sense of language.

Again, since you have a hard time with nuances, how mant homicides does this special prosecutor run around sticking her nose into?Don't know about this particular one. I guess it would be "whenever the prosecutor for the local jurisdiction has a conflict of interest in a case or otherwise may desire another attorney handle a case." I assume it happens rarely. Certainly not something that would happen in every homicide case, but since the system provides for it, it's gotta happen once in a while, and this is that once in a while.

series1811
07-12-2012, 10:51
It's obviously not a normal homicide case, because of the claim of self defense by an armed person against an apparently non-dangerous unarmed person who was minding his own business at the time the defendant saw him and made him the object of his intentions.



Well, at least we have all the facts established. That will save the jury time by not having to hear any silly witnesses or anything.

Gundude
07-12-2012, 10:54
Well, at least we have all the facts established. That will save the jury time by not having to hear any silly witnesses or anything.To the contrary, this gives a jury the opportunity to hear witnesses and see all the evidence. Something that seems abhorrent to all those that say Zimmerman should've simply been let off by virtue of one man's say.

whoflungdo
07-12-2012, 12:52
Let me try again then:

It's obviously not a normal homicide case, because of the claim of self defense by an armed person against an apparently non-dangerous unarmed person who was minding his own business at the time the defendant saw him and made him the object of his intentions.

It's wordy, more vague and sounds a little gay, but anything to protect your delicate sense of language.

Don't know about this particular one. I guess it would be "whenever the prosecutor for the local jurisdiction has a conflict of interest in a case or otherwise may desire another attorney handle a case." I assume it happens rarely. Certainly not something that would happen in every homicide case, but since the system provides for it, it's gotta happen once in a while, and this is that once in a while.


Testifying to facts not in evidence...

Chris Brines
07-12-2012, 13:14
an apparently non-dangerous unarmed person who was minding his own business at the time he was targeted.

Dude....did you really just type those words on your computer screen? Really? Come on, you're making yourself look foolish, I'm just doing you a favor by telling you, take that advice and do whatever you want with it, but if I was making a fool of myself on the internet, in front of God knows how many people, I'd want someone to tell me too.

He was "targeted", because Zimmerman thought he was casing houses for either present or future burglaries. I believe Zimmermans claim that TM was "up to no good", why? Because there had been burglaries in the neighborhood already, TM was found with what appeared to be stolen jewelry he "found", very shortly before, and I honestly don't think GZ would have followed the kid and called 911, just because he was black and was wearing a hoodie. I do believe TM was doing something he shouldn't have been doing, and that is why he was "targeted".

Now, does that mean it is ok to shoot him? No. But that's when the next innaccurate and foolish part of your assessment comes into play. Non dangerous. Sorry, but I've heard of people being killed, paralyzed, or put in comas, from brain injuries. Considering GZ's skull, the only thing protecting his brain, was being bashed into the concrete, I hardly think TM was "apparently non dangerous".

Of course we could go in circles about this like we've been doing all week, you will say, "there is no proof of this, there is no proof of that", and I will say, "it is not up to GZ to prove his innocence", but we've already been down that road. Several times. So I'm gonna leave it at that, and tell this thread farewell, so, farewell.

Gundude
07-12-2012, 13:17
Testifying to facts not in evidence...The people with access to the actual evidence are the ones who pressed the charges.

When the dust settles, it will become clear if this was a railroading or if the actual evidence justified the charges.

The ones who absolutely know that charging Zimmerman is a travesty of justice are the ones who think they know everything.

All I've said repeatedly is that Zimmerman's actions look questionable enough that a trial is warranted. Using deadly force on somebody beating on you isn't justified solely by the fact the person was beating on you. The circumstances that led up to it, in addition to the exact circumstances under which the trigger was pulled, are paramount. From my perspective it looks like those circumstances could negate a self-defense claim. I saw a small subset of the evidence, so my perspective is only that, and has no influence on anything.

Why is providing a perspective different from those who are so sure this is a railroading such a bad thing?

series1811
07-12-2012, 13:18
To the contrary, this gives a jury the opportunity to hear witnesses and see all the evidence. Something that seems abhorrent to all those that say Zimmerman should've simply been let off by virtue of one man's say.

Yeah, that stupid innocent until proven guilty thing.

countrygun
07-12-2012, 13:20
Let me try again then:

It's obviously not a normal homicide case, because of the claim of self defense by an armed person against an apparently non-dangerous unarmed person who was minding his own business at the time the defendant saw him and made him the object of his intentions.



How about this.

a man in his own neighborhood is attacked by a youth with a racial motivation and forced to defend himself.

What about Martins "racial motivation" in attacking Zimmerman?

Gundude
07-12-2012, 13:25
Yeah, that stupid innocent until proven guilty thing.So trials should only be conducted after somebody is proven guilty? How would that work?

(Presumed) innocent people are subjected to trials all the time. Many of them stay in jail until they get that trial. Zimmerman gets to stay out of jail until his trial, so he's more fortunate than most accused murderers so far.

FFR Spyder GT
07-12-2012, 13:27
Dude....did you really just type those words on your computer screen? Really? Come on, you're making yourself look foolish, I'm just doing you a favor by telling you, take that advice and do whatever you want with it, but if I was making a fool of myself on the internet, in front of God knows how many people, I'd want someone to tell me too.

He was "targeted", because Zimmerman thought he was casing houses for either present or future burglaries. I believe Zimmermans claim that TM was "up to no good", why? Because there had been burglaries in the neighborhood already, TM was found with what appeared to be stolen jewelry he "found", very shortly before, and I honestly don't think GZ would have followed the kid and called 911, just because he was black and was wearing a hoodie. I do believe TM was doing something he shouldn't have been doing, and that is why he was "targeted".

Now, does that mean it is ok to shoot him? No. But that's when the next innaccurate and foolish part of your assessment comes into play. Non dangerous. Sorry, but I've heard of people being killed, paralyzed, or put in comas, from brain injuries. Considering GZ's skull, the only thing protecting his brain, was being bashed into the concrete, I hardly think TM was "apparently non dangerous".

Of course we could go in circles about this like we've been doing all week, you will say, "there is no proof of this, there is no proof of that", and I will say, "it is not up to GZ to prove his innocence", but we've already been down that road. Several times. So I'm gonna leave it at that, and tell this thread farewell, so, farewell.

Ok, you are making a fool of yourself.

Did you really just type those words on your computer screen? Really? Come on, you're making yourself look foolish, I'm just doing you a favor by telling you, take that advice and do whatever you want with it.

All you posted was a bunch of BS that has been posted by a bunch of RWR ( Right-Wing Racist).

Everything you posted was either pure BS or was a result of some imagination.

The BS about the jewelry was proven to be false back in March and you want to bring up that BS again?

You said you wanted someone to tell you so consider this as being told.

series1811
07-12-2012, 13:28
So trials should only be conducted after somebody is proven guilty? How would that work?

(Presumed) innocent people are subjected to trials all the time. Many of them stay in jail until they get that trial. Zimmerman gets to stay out of jail until his trial, so he's more fortunate than most accused murderers so far.

You don't really have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

Every once in a while, we would have a trial where there would be a juror on it, who was so far out there, that the other jurors would come out of the trial, hunting us down and apologizing to us for the hung jury and mistrial he had caused.

I recognize you as one of the ones I think they were talking about.

countrygun
07-12-2012, 13:32
Ok, you are making a fool of yourself.

Did you really just type those words on your computer screen? Really? Come on, you're making yourself look foolish, I'm just doing you a favor by telling you, take that advice and do whatever you want with it.

All you posted was a bunch of BS that has been posted by a bunch of RWR ( Right-Wing Racist).


THE RACE CARD^^^^^^

Everything you posted was either pure BS or was a result of some imagination.

The BS about the jewelry was proven to be false back in March and you want to bring up that BS again?

You said you wanted someone to tell you so consider this as being told.

Just couldn't help yourself could you?:upeyes:

Gundude
07-12-2012, 13:33
How about this.

a man in his own neighborhood is attacked by a youth with a racial motivation and forced to defend himself.

What about Martins "racial motivation" in attacking Zimmerman?I agree the whole "racial motivation" thing is disturbing. I haven't seen anything to indicate Zimmerman was motivated by racism. Again, my perspective. I haven't seen a good chunk of the evidence. I already agreed many times the press is dispicable for focusing on the racial aspect, but I'm not surprised they did. My disdain for the press isn't a secret.

But just because the press is clamoring for a certain outcome, it doesn't mean those involved need to strive for the opposite outcome just to spite the press.

whoflungdo
07-12-2012, 13:34
The people with access to the actual evidence are the ones who pressed the charges.

When the dust settles, it will become clear if this was a railroading or if the actual evidence justified the charges.

The ones who absolutely know that charging Zimmerman is a travesty of justice are the ones who think they know everything.

All I've said repeatedly is that Zimmerman's actions look questionable enough that a trial is warranted. Using deadly force on somebody beating on you isn't justified solely by the fact the person was beating on you. The circumstances that led up to it, in addition to the exact circumstances under which the trigger was pulled, are paramount. From my perspective it looks like those circumstances could negate a self-defense claim. I saw a small subset of the evidence, so my perspective is only that, and has no influence on anything.

Why is providing a perspective different from those who are so sure this is a railroading such a bad thing?

You are the one that used the words "apparently non-dangerous".. there is no evidence available to the public that suggests that. You made a statement that cannot be supported by anything known to the public. All the evidence available to the public contradicts your "apparently non-dangerous" opinion.

Gundude
07-12-2012, 13:36
You don't really have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

Every once in a while, we would have a trial where there would be a juror on it, who was so far out there, that the other jurors would come out of the trial, hunting us down and apologizing to us for the hung jury and mistrial he had caused.

I recognize you as one of the ones I think they were talking about.You brought up innocent until proven guilty. I never said Zimmerman was guilty, only that his actions are rightfully coming under the scrutiny of the trial process.

If I misinterpreted what you meant by your one-line post: "Yeah, that stupid innocent until proven guilty thing.", then I apologize and ask for clarification of what you meant.

whoflungdo
07-12-2012, 13:37
Just couldn't help yourself could you?:upeyes:

Godwin's law quickly to follow..

Gundude
07-12-2012, 13:52
You are the one that used the words "apparently non-dangerous".. there is no evidence available to the public that suggests that. You made a statement that cannot be supported by anything known to the public. All the evidence available to the public contradicts your "apparently non-dangerous" opinion.Wow, I guess I have to always type ten times as many words than are necessary to get a point across, since everybody's a lawyer and reading my posts like they're billion dollar contracts:

Martin was not dangerous to Zimmerman until Zimmerman began to follow him.

I assume all of you are dangerous too, in that you will apply violence when called for. Yet you're not a danger to those you don't feel threatened by.

Oh no! Now I said Zimmerman "threatened' Martin! Let me write another post to explain that word.

On second thought, nah.

countrygun
07-12-2012, 13:55
Godwin's law quickly to follow..


Indeed, he has been throwing the Race card around in threads today like he just got a new box of them. Anytime now he will turn them over and put Godwins law on the table.

ETA: I am polishing my boots and pressing my uniform in preparation.

whoflungdo
07-12-2012, 14:03
Wow, I guess I have to always type ten times as many words than are necessary to get a point across, since everybody's a lawyer and reading my posts like they're billion dollar contracts:

Martin was not dangerous to Zimmerman until Zimmerman began to follow him.

I assume all of you are dangerous too, in that you will apply violence when called for. Yet you're not a danger to those you don't feel threatened by.

Oh no! Now I said Zimmerman "threatened' Martin! Let me write another post to explain that word.

On second thought, nah.

Zimmerman was not dangerous to Martin until Martin began beating him, smashing his head into the sidewalk, and "apparently" going for Zimmerman's gun.

You are correct in one assumption though, people are dangerous when they have to defend themselves and/or their lives...

countrygun
07-12-2012, 14:13
Wow, I guess I have to always type ten times as many words than are necessary to get a point across, since everybody's a lawyer and reading my posts like they're billion dollar contracts:

Martin was not dangerous to Zimmerman until Zimmerman began to follow him.

I assume all of you are dangerous too, in that you will apply violence when called for. Yet you're not a danger to those you don't feel threatened by.

Oh no! Now I said Zimmerman "threatened' Martin! Let me write another post to explain that word.

On second thought, nah.

Your line of logic is as useless as a cheesecloth condom and full of as many holes

Acccording to you, Martin felt threatened.

Now Martin had the means and opportunity to avail himself of the quite legal option of calling the police. He chose not to do that and instead took the illegal action of assaulting Zimmerman (the pattern of injuries on both men make that evident, even to you).

Now, as we know, Zimmerman HAD called the police and was waiting for them to arrive. It seems that Martin, if he ever felt threatened and not just "dissed", was mistaken and Zimmerman was not a "threat".

You are therefore saying that if you feel, mistakenly (as Martin was mistaken) that someone is a threat to you, that you may jump on them and pummel them and they should not be able to defend themselves.

Cavalry Doc
07-12-2012, 14:25
I cannot wait for this trial to end....... Well, I guess I can, but it will be an unpleasant wait.

whoflungdo
07-12-2012, 14:26
I cannot wait for this trial to end....... Well, I guess I can, but it will be an unpleasant wait.


But then you'll get the civil trial.. Just remember how long it took for the OJ story to end.. I'm predicting similar results..

countrygun
07-12-2012, 14:29
But then you'll get the civil trial.. Just remember how long it took for the OJ story to end.. I'm predicting similar results..


You are referring to Zimmermans lawsuit against NBC etc?

You do know when Zimmerman is found innocent he is immune from civil suit?

whoflungdo
07-12-2012, 14:51
You are referring to Zimmermans lawsuit against NBC etc?

You do know when Zimmerman is found innocent he is immune from civil suit?

If everything from what I've seen is true, I hope Zimmerman does sue NBC and wins.

That would be on the local level. I'm no lawyer, but I wonder how far a Federal Civil suit could or would go. Also, if there is a hung jury or a mistrial and the prosecution decides not to try it again, there would be no declaration of guilt or acquittal..

countrygun
07-12-2012, 15:19
If everything from what I've seen is true, I hope Zimmerman does sue NBC and wins.

That would be on the local level. I'm no lawyer, but I wonder how far a Federal Civil suit could or would go. Also, if there is a hung jury or a mistrial and the prosecution decides not to try it again, there would be no declaration of guilt or acquittal..


And if I read Florida law correctly he would still be considered immune until a "guilty" verdict is rendered. He can sheild behind SYG until a conviction proves it wasn't.

As to a Federal action he would have to be prosecuted under a violation of civil rights. Bear in mind (and this freaks people out) The FBI, during the civil rights struggle could not go after the Klan or racists for "murder" there was no Federal Statute, they had to prosecute under a violation of civil rights. that is as to "Criminal" prosecution. I thas been a long time since I studied such things but IIRC a "Suit" under Federal jurisdiction generally has to be a "class action" or interstate commerce, etc type of suit that can't be settled under State law. Suits between individuals are a "local" matter.