Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[bookworm]

You're just making things up.

No more than anyone who says Zimmerman attacked Martin. Except I have the bloody head and the witness who saw M on top of Z on my side.

 

[RandFan]

No more than anyone who says Zimmerman attacked Martin. Except I have the bloody head and the witness who saw M on top of Z on my side.

Assuming the witnesses testimony is correct it doesn't mean that Zimmerman didn't attack Martin and then get his head handed to him. It has happened. People have posted youtube videos in this thread of people who initiate a fight and then get their ass kicked.

 

[Xulld]

Assuming the witnesses testimony is correct it doesn't mean that Zimmerman didn't attack Martin and then get his head handed to him. It has happened. People have posted youtube videos in this thread of people who initiate a fight and then get their ass kicked.

Absence of evidence . . . .

You're just making things up.

Making things up is VERY different than relating a witness statement. Zimmerman is a witness. If you think you have evidence which conclusively shows his statement is unreliable, we are all ears. So far every attempt has failed to be conclusive, or was based on speculation.

The "John" Witness backs up part of Zimmerman's account, so does the 911 tapes, so does other witness statements. The physical evidence appears to also favor Zims story. I am sure we will see all the details soon, and even more speculation come out, but right this minute, does not look good for the narrative that Zim attacked Martin.

So far it appears Zimmerman's statement is intact, and well founded.

This is the problem.

The only rebuttals have been that becuase he was armed he should have known better than to put himself in such a situation, or that becuase he was an adult he should have known better, or that becuase he was frustrated by criminals taking advantage of his neighborhood and wanted police to confront martin that he was deranged.

So far nothing of substance. Certainly nothing of legal substance, IANAL.

 

[Unabogie]

Absence of evidence . . . .



Making things up is VERY different than relating a witness statement. Zimmerman is a witness. If you think you have evidence which conclusively shows his statement is unreliable, we are all ears. So far every attempt has failed to be conclusive, or was based on speculation.

The "John" Witness backs up part of Zimmerman's account, so does the 911 tapes, so does other witness statements. The physical evidence appears to also favor Zims story. I am sure we will see all the details soon, and even more speculation come out, but right this minute, does not look good for the narrative that Zim attacked Martin.

So far it appears Zimmerman's statement is intact, and well founded.

This is the problem.

Where did Trayvon "jump out of" before this attack? Can you show me on the map? Can you show me where his body was found? If not, then claiming Trayvon "jumped out" of somewhere as if that is a fact is making things up. Add to that you can hear them both talking before any altercation took place and the idea that Martin jumped out and hit Zimmerman by surprise it UNsupported by any evidence.

And all John saw was the fight after it started. Claiming to know how the fight started requires "making it up".

 

[marplots]

Assuming the witnesses testimony is correct it doesn't mean that Zimmerman didn't attack Martin and then get his head handed to him. It has happened. People have posted youtube videos in this thread of people who initiate a fight and then get their ass kicked.

Or shot, apparently.

 

[Xulld]

Where did Trayvon "jump out of" before this attack? Can you show me on the map? Can you show me where his body was found? If not, then claiming Trayvon "jumped out" of somewhere as if that is a fact is making things up. Add to that you can hear them both talking before any altercation took place and the idea that Martin jumped out and hit Zimmerman by surprise it UNsupported by any evidence.

And all John saw was the fight after it started. Claiming to know how the fight started requires "making it up".

Making things up is VERY different than relating a witness statement. Zimmerman is a witness.

Still does not make sense? Try rereading it. You have failed to create a conclusive narrative that refutes Zimmerman's statement.

 

[Giz]

unlike other people in this thread, I'm not prepared to make assumptions and pretend they are facts.

That brightened up my day considerably. Thank you.

 

[RandFan]

Or shot, apparently.

It has happened. Of course. Did it happen in this case? Some people think they know. Some of us know we don't.

 

[bookworm]

Where did Trayvon "jump out of" before this attack? Can you show me on the map? Can you show me where his body was found? If not, then claiming Trayvon "jumped out" of somewhere as if that is a fact is making things up. Add to that you can hear them both talking before any altercation took place and the idea that Martin jumped out and hit Zimmerman by surprise it UNsupported by any evidence.

And all John saw was the fight after it started. Claiming to know how the fight started requires "making it up".

Alright. I concede the point about the "jumping out." I did see a map with the timeline of the phone calls which strongly suggested to me that T waited around for a confrontation instead of continuing home. I want to take a look at the link posted a little upthread and see what I think of that but I have to wait until later to do it. DeeDee (T's "girlfriend") gave a statement that T didn't want to run (which he was already doing, BTW, so it sounds to me like he wanted to impress DeeDee) and she also suggested that T confronted Z with the "Why are you following me?" Add this to the fact that he was running and instead of continuing home he told DeeDee he wasn't going to run and it sure makes a good case to me that T started the confrontation. And since Z lost sight of him, that makes a good case to me that T hid and "jumped out". But the jumping out is speculation......

 

[GWCarver]

How much you want to bet the word circled or circling
(if you're going to be so nitpicky )

is going to be in the police report of what Zimmerman gave as his statement that night?

Sig-line for a month work for you?

So, you are saying that "started to circle", "circled", and "was circling" all have the same meaning? If that is your position, I'll bet you are greatly outnumbered by those who feel they have different meanings.

BTW, I wouldn't make that bet. If Zimmerman said TM had circled around the building and attacked him, I would lose the bet. The bottom line is I don't know exactly what is in his statements and neither do you.

Would you agree that all three would be provocative actions on the part of TM? I would say if TM "started to circle the truck" it would be much less provocative than if he was "circling" the truck. If he "circled" the truck, that would be in the middle of the TM playing ring around the truck provocation scale.

I think TM probably walked up to Zimmerman's truck and asked him a question, and that is where this all originated. I believe it was Zimmerman's dad who said that is what happened.

 

[Giz]

It has happened. Of course. Did it happen in this case? Some people think they know. Some of us know we don't.

Wow, you make a perfunctory statement every tenth post or so and then spend the remainder of them fixedly pushing the line that GZ was the one who was responsible for causing the confrontation.

OTOH, some of us actually say: we don't know if GZ caused it. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't. (And getting out of your car, even if armed, doesn't necessarily make you responsible for any ensuing confrontation... that depends on what both parties did after that).

 

[Noztradamus]

~~~~
I think TM probably walked up to Zimmerman's truck and asked him a question, and that is where this all originated.

Is this some new definition of "probably"?

If it happened before Zimmerman's not911 call, his failure to mention it is suspicious.
It obviously didn't happen during that call, or it would have been recorded.
And it didn't happen after the call because Zimmerman never returned to his truck.

I believe it was Zimmerman's dad who said that is what happened.

I suspect that Robert is his son's father

 

[johnny karate]

A picture of a bloody head taken minutes after the incident? I don't find it very believable that he did that to himself.

So the only possible explanation for Zimmerman's injuries is that Martin repeatedly smashed his head onto the ground?

 

[GWCarver]

Is this some new definition of "probably"?

If it happened before Zimmerman's not911 call, his failure to mention it is suspicious.
It obviously didn't happen during that call, or it would have been recorded.
And it didn't happen after the call because Zimmerman never returned to his truck.



I suspect that Robert is his son's father

I don't understand your problem with my usage of the word "probably". What word would you suggest I use? Then we can proceed with the rest of your post.

 

[Moss]

Probably gone over already a dozen times but may I ask where that circling is supposed to be placed within the timeline of TM's and GZ's encounter that night? (75+ hours workweek kept me from following the thread, sorry...)

 

[johnny karate]

You have failed to create a conclusive narrative that refutes Zimmerman's statement.

And of course unless a claim can be disproved, that claim must automatically be assumed true. This is exactly how skeptical thought works.

 

[RandFan]

Wow, you make a perfunctory statement every tenth post or so and then spend the remainder of them fixedly pushing the line that GZ was the one who was responsible for causing the confrontation.

OTOH, some of us actually say: we don't know if GZ caused it. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't. (And getting out of your car, even if armed, doesn't necessarily make you responsible for any ensuing confrontation... that depends on what both parties did after that).

Go look in the mirror. You are projecting.

Getting out of his car does not make GZ necessarily responsible. I never said it did no matter how hard you try to make it otherwise. I'm saying that if you are armed and there is a person that you find suspicious and you are scared of, you ought not get out of the car. Simple. Straight forward. Not confusing. I'm also saying that it is reckless and possibly criminally so. I don't declare that it is.

Now, you have yet to turn that into something that it's not so spare me the lectures. And seriously, go look in a mirror.

 

[Noztradamus]

I don't understand your problem with my usage of the word "probably".

Thank you for that imformation, although I think I implied that that was already my belief

What word would you suggest I use?

"never" would seem appropriate.

 

[RandFan]

OTOH, some of us actually say: we don't know if GZ caused it. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't.

Oh yeah?

Yeah, just one: why don't you stop blaming the victim?

"The victim" how exactly is that equivalent to "we don't know"? Explain that to me? Doesn't that imply that you do know?

 

[Mumbles]

Is it your contention that GZ attacked Martin?

So he called the police, knowing they were on their way, just like he had done many times in the past, but this time decided he would attack the suspect, not knowing how far out the police were?

That makes sense to you?

Not to me. Of course, pulling over and calling the cops on a guy walking down the street in the evening also makes no sense. And not saying "he's circling my car" if said person circles your car also makes no sense. And getting out of your car to pursue a guy that you're scared of definitely makes no sense. And yet, by his own story, he did all of the above.

Frankly, I hink he part about "circling" is a lie on his part. But the police call and the pursuit both show Zimmerman to be pretty irrational, so I'm not sure why we should eliminate the idea that he struck first, or attempted to detain Martin, knowing that police were on their way.