• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dan O. said:
I thought George's first priority was to keep from getting his face smashed. Wasn't he just one more blow away from spoon feeding and pampers for the rest of his life? If he puts his guard down to go for the gun there will be a fist comming through. That is, unless Trayvon had already stopped fighting him.

Did any of the witnesses hear Trayvon tell George he was going to die? Did George suddenly become a psychic and knew that was what Trayvon was thinking without it being said? Or could it be that George only thought that to himself while he was busy screaming his head off? Perhaps though, it was in the moment that trayvon started to get off of George that George saw the opportunity to stop this ******* before he gets away.
Click to expand...
Looks like we've got another poster drinking watermelon juice and codeine. Hey, I've got an idea. Maybe GZ was never attacked by TM at all. He shot him with a silencer, then rolled around with TM's body on top of him and screamed and put on a show for the neighbors, then pulled out his gun and shot him without the silencer, then banged his head into the ground a few times to cover his self-defense claim. Ya, that's the ticket!
 
WildCat said:
Uh, what? Where are you getting this stuff?
Click to expand...


It's just what I remember from reading this thread and related articles. I could be wrong but it doesn't seem worth the effort to verify this stuff when posters will dispute or dismiss it whether it is true or not. When I see that a team has formed that is not Pro-TM or Pro-GZ but actually seeking to discover the truth, then I'll join that team and make an effort to contribute.
 
I read some claims that GZ stated that after he shot TM, TM said "OK, you got it". This is the first I've seen the addition of "Now you're going to die" to that statement. I have read that GZ said TM told him at the beginning of the confrontation "you're going to die". I have not seen any of the above substantiated, I assumed was based on leaks to the media tha may or may not be accurate.
 
LTC8K6 said:
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/5/23/133958/924

Jeralyn on witnesses.
Click to expand...
Why the **** does it take some obscure blog site to point this OBVIOUS **** out while so-called "major" news organizations go with idiotic and shallow reporting? And even in the rare event that the mainstream media gives decent coverage they almost always have to **** it up with their relentless game of showing "both sides" of every argument, even if it means that one side is wrong and with 0 merit. Rant off.

Anyhow, that analysis is spot on.
 
WildCat said:
1 work phone and 1 personal phone? Many employers don't allow you to use a work phone for personal use.
Click to expand...


So the work phone can only be used by other people.


Years ago when cell phones were still novilties, my employer gave me one because they wanted to be able to reach me when I wasn't working. Part of the implicit agreement for carrying their leash is that I will use it for personal calls. it's no different that using the office landline.

http://www.irs.gov/govt/fslg/article/0,,id=184791,00.html
De Minimis Fringe Benefits
...
o Personal use of a cell phone provided by an employer primarily for business purposes​
 
Dan O. said:
It's just what I remember from reading this thread and related articles. I could be wrong but it doesn't seem worth the effort to verify this stuff when posters will dispute or dismiss it whether it is true or not. When I see that a team has formed that is not Pro-TM or Pro-GZ but actually seeking to discover the truth, then I'll join that team and make an effort to contribute.
Click to expand...

The "Pro-GZ" team is definitely interested in the facts, so feel free to hop aboard. Be advised, though, that this member already has dumped Z once, when the "intermediate distance" headline on MSNBC's website went up. But, it only took about 20 minutes to find that MSNBC didn't bother to define the term in their own headline anywhere in the article, and the truth was only a few searches away. Then I was back on the team.
 
Cylinder said:
...

Good luck with that. Already, the state is having to rehabilitate witnesses to simply make it past an immunity hearing. I don't think you're gonna see some tactic to upgrade charges at any point in the immediate future.
Click to expand...

There's not going to be an immunity hearing. Mark it.
 
Rare Truth said:
There's not going to be an immunity hearing. Mark it.
Click to expand...

I know O'Mara has been somewhat coy in his past responses to questions about immunity hearings, but he didn't know at that time what evidence the state had against his client, and defense attorneys in general don't want their clients to take the stand.

I think Z proved he is running the show when he took the stand at the bond hearing and issued his "apology", and I think Z would want an immunity hearing. So, unless some major incriminating evidence surfaces that hasn't been made public - and I don't think it will - I think Z will go for the evidenciary hearing, prove the shooting was self-defense with a preponderance of the evidence, and walk out a free and immune man.

I do think O'Mara will try to talk him out of it. I reserve the right to change my opinion based on what exactly Z's civil exposure might be based on the various potential outcomes.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom