aacx22
Tested Selected Initiated
See, I'm of the opinion that TM was trying to defend his own life. Do you agree that people should have the right to self defense?
Sent from my XT557 using Tapatalk 2
Zimmerman arrested again.
- Thread starter S&W645
- Start date
See, I'm of the opinion that TM was trying to defend his own life. Do you agree that people should have the right to self defense?
Sent from my XT557 using Tapatalk 2
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
I am of the opinion that the jury found Martin guilty of being the aggressor and Zimmerman defended himself. So yes I do agree in self defense.
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
aacx22
Tested Selected Initiated
Ok. I am of the opinion that TM felt like GZ was dangerous to his safety resulting in his need to first run andthen fight. Considering that GZ killed TM, TM seemed to have been right.
Sent from my XT557 using Tapatalk 2
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
aacx22
Tested Selected Initiated
Not exactly. All they did was say that GZ was not guilty of murder. That doesn't specifically mean that they believe that he wasn't the aggressor. He didn't meet the legal requirement for murder and that's it. I have not seen anyone ever dispute the sequence that TM ran, GZ pursued, and then the two fought. Everything that happened was built upon the encounter that GZ forced to happen. If anyone here was chased down like TM was, I bet that the majority of people here would have drawn on and/or fired on GZ in self defense. However these same people don't believe that TM had a right to defend himself, which I can not understand... but there is no use for each of us to keep on repeating our stance. Maybe people here would have supported TM more if he had a gun to defend himself, but since he only had his hands only unarmedcombat.com (fictional site) supports him.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
Not exactly. All they did was say that GZ was not guilty of murder. That doesn't specifically mean that they believe that he wasn't the aggressor. He didn't meet the legal requirement for murder and that's it. I have not seen anyone ever dispute the sequence that TM ran, GZ pursued, and then the two fought. Everything that happened was built upon the encounter that GZ forced to happen. If anyone here was chased down like TM was, I bet that the majority of people here would have drawn on and/or fired on GZ in self defense. However these same people don't believe that TM had a right to defend himself, which I can not understand... but there is no use for each of us to keep on repeating our stance. Maybe people here would have supported TM more if he had a gun to defend himself, but since he only had his hands only unarmedcombat.com (fictional site) supports him.
Are you purposefully leaving out half the story to fit your narrative and opinion? Hoping half truths will win over others?
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
aacx22
Tested Selected Initiated
I wrote a short post containing 161 words in it that described my thoughts, and was not intended to fully describe everything that happened between February 26, 2012 and July 13, 2013. If you think that I missed something that belonged in my brief post, please tell me what it is and why its needed. Thanks.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
You forgot the part where GZ was retreating back to his vehicle when he was approached by TM.
Are you saying if you were being followed, and you ran and got away, you would backtrack and shoot them?
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
aacx22
Tested Selected Initiated
That is what GZ says, but that is not what the evidence shows. Where he ended up killing TM does not support him trying to return to his car. The jury found that he was not guilty of murder, but I do not believe that the jury has gone step by step and stated everything that they believe happened up until the shooting. As far as I know, all we have that supports GZ's claim that he was returning to his car is his testimony.
That's the map. I cannot see any possible way GZ can claim that he was returning to his car. The fight happened between the buildings in point 5, pretty close to TM's home. If GZ had gone past that point and backtracked TM would have probably been home already. There is also only one path, so unless GZ was going through peoples side yards he had to pursue TM by the same path he took. Clearly the legal definition of murder could not be proven, but that does not mean that everything GZ alleged is true or even that it makes sense.
So yeah... it's not a half truth that I left out what I believe to be BS.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
That is what GZ says, but that is not what the evidence shows. Where he ended up killing TM does not support him trying to return to his car. The jury found that he was not guilty of murder, but I do not believe that the jury has gone step by step and stated everything that they believe happened up until the shooting. As far as I know, all we have that supports GZ's claim that he was returning to his car is his testimony.
That's the map. I cannot see any possible way GZ can claim that he was returning to his car. The fight happened between the buildings in point 5, pretty close to TM's home. If GZ had gone past that point and backtracked TM would have probably been home already...
So yeah... it's not a half truth that I left out what I believe to be BS.
They reviewed the evidence, if he caught up and started the fight he would have been found guilty.
Good point though, how did the football athlete not make it home? He hid and waited, approached GZ who was on his way back to his truck.
Jury reviewed it, street both sides started their case, and he was found innocent.
Are you saying if you were being followed, and you ran and got away, you would backtrack and shoot them?
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
aacx22
Tested Selected Initiated
No, I don't think that's automatically true.
No. You are making **** up. It doesn't even make sense! How the hell could GZ be FOLLOWING TM, then turn around and head BACK, and somehow wind up with a hidden TM between him and his truck? The reason why he didn't make it home was that he was shot to death by GZ. The reason GZ shot him was that they were fighting. The reason that they were fighting was that GZ chased TM down and confronted him. That is the root cause right there. Prior to that, TM had every right to walk home on the sidewalk.
Jury found GZ not guilty of murder. That doesn't mean that he didn't cause what happened. Look above at what I said. If you do not find any quotes where I said that nonsense you are asking about, then guess what? I didn't say it!
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Phone records proved that there were more than two minutes between when Zimmerman hung up the phone with 911, and when Rachel Jeantel's call with Martin disconnected. Jeantel's testimony established that Martin confronted Zimmerman seconds before their call disconnected. Zimmerman never got anywhere near where Martin was staying that night (it wasn't his home for those who like to talk like they know something about the case when they don't know sh!t from shinola), and Martin could've been on his dad's girlfriend's couch with his feet up on the coffee table chowin' down on Skittles and Arizona Watermelon Drink with a cough syrup chaser watching a basketball game well before that two minutes expired in the last criminal act of his life.
During his closing arguments, O'mara's chart on reasonable doubt was right on point, and it included going both ways - It takes proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman didn't act in self defense, and, if that's found, it takes beyond a reasonable doubt that he did commit murder 2 or manslaughter, and he tied it together that if they go back and determine that it was legitimate self defense on one charge, it applies on the other charge as well, and they can go home right after that finding is read in court. And that's exactly what the jury found!
It was a self defense case. If the jury didn't believe Zimmerman acted in self defense, it would've been their duty to convict him on either Murder 2 or Manslaughter, period! Jeantel's testimony establishes clearly that Martin didn't go back to the apartment he was staying in, because if he did, then he could not have gotten back to where the fight began two minutes after Zimmerman hung up with the cops, and no one outside of Florida would've ever heard of Trayvon Martin or George Zimmerman to this day. There is zero evidence in any court record or police report that supports the notion that Zimmerman "chased down" Martin.
Ignoring me or my posts and refusing to accept the record as it stands won't change that plain and simple fact. Not even De La Rionda engaged in as much fantasy bullchit in his closing argument attempt to railroad Zimmerman, as the idiot in this thread spending all his energies trying to convert a full trial and jury verdict into denied "justice" for Trayvon Martin. It was a run-of-the-mill self defense case that even the cops and local DA didn't want to charge on. It would've remained in obscurity for perpetuity if the politics of race hadn't entered into it from the White House on down to the Governor's Office and then handed off to Angela Corey as a Special Prosecutor to "investigate." The results of her "investigation" though, was a foregone conclusion, and even with the full weight of state level government trying to convert a legal self defense case into a show-trial resulting in a guilty verdict against the "white Hispanic," backed by numerous biased statements from Obama and Holder long before a jury was ever seated, Zimmerman still prevailed in front of a jury of his peers, yet this idiot thinks he knows better than they what happened.
You're entitled to your opinions, aacx22, but you're not entitled to your own set of facts, and so far, you haven't gotten a single established fact right.
Blues
During his closing arguments, O'mara's chart on reasonable doubt was right on point, and it included going both ways - It takes proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman didn't act in self defense, and, if that's found, it takes beyond a reasonable doubt that he did commit murder 2 or manslaughter, and he tied it together that if they go back and determine that it was legitimate self defense on one charge, it applies on the other charge as well, and they can go home right after that finding is read in court. And that's exactly what the jury found!
It was a self defense case. If the jury didn't believe Zimmerman acted in self defense, it would've been their duty to convict him on either Murder 2 or Manslaughter, period! Jeantel's testimony establishes clearly that Martin didn't go back to the apartment he was staying in, because if he did, then he could not have gotten back to where the fight began two minutes after Zimmerman hung up with the cops, and no one outside of Florida would've ever heard of Trayvon Martin or George Zimmerman to this day. There is zero evidence in any court record or police report that supports the notion that Zimmerman "chased down" Martin.
Ignoring me or my posts and refusing to accept the record as it stands won't change that plain and simple fact. Not even De La Rionda engaged in as much fantasy bullchit in his closing argument attempt to railroad Zimmerman, as the idiot in this thread spending all his energies trying to convert a full trial and jury verdict into denied "justice" for Trayvon Martin. It was a run-of-the-mill self defense case that even the cops and local DA didn't want to charge on. It would've remained in obscurity for perpetuity if the politics of race hadn't entered into it from the White House on down to the Governor's Office and then handed off to Angela Corey as a Special Prosecutor to "investigate." The results of her "investigation" though, was a foregone conclusion, and even with the full weight of state level government trying to convert a legal self defense case into a show-trial resulting in a guilty verdict against the "white Hispanic," backed by numerous biased statements from Obama and Holder long before a jury was ever seated, Zimmerman still prevailed in front of a jury of his peers, yet this idiot thinks he knows better than they what happened.
You're entitled to your opinions, aacx22, but you're not entitled to your own set of facts, and so far, you haven't gotten a single established fact right.
Blues
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
That's exactly what happened. I don't have to make anything up, the jury decided Zimmerman's testimony had the most truth to it. If you can't see all the hiding spots around section 5, you are blind. TM had more than enough time to turn the corner and hide in a bush, or behind a corner.
How did an overweight male catch up to a high school football player? He didn't, he couldn't, he turned back and was confronted.
Are you saying if you were being followed, and you ran and got away, you would backtrack and shoot them?
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
aacx22
Tested Selected Initiated
Makes no sense at all. You can't reconcile your statements that TM was hiding in wait, and GZ turned around and was heading back to his truck before being ambushed. These two statements do not work together.
You are the only one saying this.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
You're hopeless, but that's okay because it made sense to the jury.
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
aacx22
Tested Selected Initiated
Whatever. You still can't explain how TM teleported behind GZ, but that's cool eo... just ignore the inconsistencies and believe what you want to believe.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
I explained it. Zimmerman passed TM who was out of sight. TM didn't run home, he stopped, got out of sight, then approached the "creepy ass cracker" walking away.
You won't accept anything other than your opinion...no matter what anyone says, jury, Zimmerman, whoever. You can make up as many facts as you want to create as many inconsistencies as you want, the jury proves your bull**** wrong.
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
aacx22
Tested Selected Initiated
No. The jury only said that GZ was not guilty of murder. Also "facts" cannot be made up... they either are or they are not. Your theory that TM lay in wait allowing GZ to pass, and then attack him when he returned also makes no sense. What possible advantage did TM gain by not ambushing GZ from his hiding spot as he was approaching, as opposed to as he was returning to his truck? Your logic is flawed.
longslide10
New member
There's 12 people that would highly disagree with your statement.
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
You sure like to make up facts. My logic is as flawed as the jury that found him innocent. Your logic is as flawed as TM, look where that got him.
Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app
