Phokus
Lifer
- Nov 20, 1999
- 22,994
- 779
- 126
"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John.
John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot.
"And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point."
Read more: http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/new...led-in-neighborhood-altercation#ixzz1pZUeOSKv
Are we still ignoring the only witness that saw and heard what happened? That martin was on top, beating zimmerman, zimmerman calling for help?
Pick a fight, fear for your life, shoot to kill.
Good shoot.
I fucking love Florida.
Do we have any evidence that says zimmerman was the aggressor as opposed to this evidence that says Martin is?
Do we have any evidence that says zimmerman was the aggressor as opposed to this evidence that says Martin is?
Do we have any evidence that says zimmerman was the aggressor as opposed to this evidence that says Martin is?
Got out of his vehicle. That's all I need to know. Martin acted in self defense.
Are we still ignoring the only witness that saw and heard what happened? That martin was on top, beating zimmerman, zimmerman calling for help?
Do we have any evidence that says zimmerman was the aggressor as opposed to this evidence that says Martin is?
That's where you (and all the others looking for mob justice) are plain wrong. Getting out of the vehicle does NOT mean the shooting was not self defense. Zimmerman can get out of his vehicle and ask someone what they are doing in the neighborhood. He has no authority to physically detain someone, but he certainly can ask them questions. If he tried to physically detain Martin, and then Martin (fearing for his safety) fought back, then I don't see how self defense can be argued in this case. If Martin initiated a physical confrontation (after Zimmerman asked him questions), then the self defense argument could make sense.
No evidence says Martin was. None. Except the ones you make up.
If I'm walking in a crime invested area, I see someone following me and run b/c I don't want to get jacked. This person then gets out of his car to chase after me, he's an imminent threat and I have the right to defend myself. There is zero evidence that Zimmerman identified himself and even if he did, why should I believe him?
If I'm walking in a crime invested area, I see someone following me and run b/c I don't want to get jacked. This person then gets out of his car to chase after me, he's an imminent threat and I have the right to defend myself. There is zero evidence that Zimmerman identified himself and even if he did, why should I believe him?
If I'm walking in a crime invested area, I see someone following me and run b/c I don't want to get jacked. This person then gets out of his car to chase after me, he's an imminent threat and I have the right to defend myself. There is zero evidence that Zimmerman identified himself and even if he did, why should I believe him?
Unless that was Mr Zimmerman calling out for help
I agree with you 100%, and if that's how it went down, then the self defense argument won't fly. Zimmerman had no authority to detain anyone. He can ask questions all he wants (including getting out of his car), but if he initiated physical contact, he's the aggressor and Martin has every right to defend himself. But..... in order for Zimmerman to be arrested/tried/convicted, there has to be PROOF to show that's what happened. I'm assuming Zimmerman told a different story (I don't know what exactly he told the PD), and they (apparently) don't have enough evidence to PROVE that his story isn't how it happened.
Another thing that is somewhat puzzling. If Zimmerman chased Martin, how could a 250 pound (overweight) guy chase down an athletic 17 year old (a football player) running in fear of his life?
That interpretation of the tapes doesn't really track with common sense in my opinion, though certainly anything is possible. As spidey is so fond of saying with relish, dead men tell no tales.
Zimmerman had zero authority to question and pursue anyone. Once he did that, he then becomes the aggressor by nature.
And lastly the biggest one of all, Zimmerman pursued and fought this kid, who had no weapons and COMMITTED NO CRIME.
One would also think that if it could be proven that it was Trayvon Martin calling out for help that the DA would be able to establish a probable cause to arrest Mr Zimmerman on at a minimum manslaughter charges however, that doesn't appear to be the case.
The lying by the police about contents of 911 tapes and witness coaching prevents a fair investigation by SPD. Federal government needs to get in here ASAP
That's where you (and all the others looking for mob justice) are plain wrong. Getting out of the vehicle does NOT mean the shooting was not self defense. Zimmerman can get out of his vehicle and ask someone what they are doing in the neighborhood. He has no authority to physically detain someone, but he certainly can ask them questions. If he tried to physically detain Martin, and then Martin (fearing for his safety) fought back, then I don't see how self defense can be argued in this case. If Martin initiated a physical confrontation (after Zimmerman asked him questions), then the self defense argument could make sense.
DA gets info from SPD. It has already been shown it is a corrupt investigation.
