Truth finally coming out Zimmerman/Martin

[6pak2go]

Culture
New Reports on Zimmerman/Martin Incident

When news broke that neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman had shot Trayvon Martin, and the race-bait political hustlers took charge, we cautioned that the facts should be allowed to play out before people jumped to conclusions. Two major facts are out this week: Zimmerman's medical report and Martin's autopsy. Both strongly indicate that, contrary to the racist outrage on the Left, Zimmerman was telling the truth about the altercation that led to Martin's death.

Zimmerman was examined immediately following the incident, and he had a broken nose, two black eyes, two lacerations on the back of his head and a minor back injury. The back of his shirt was also wet and grass-stained. Meanwhile, Martin's autopsy revealed that his only injury -- outside the fatal gunshot wound -- was bloodied knuckles, and that he had drugs in his system, just as Zimmerman suspected and told the 911 dispatcher. Martin's shirt also had gunshot residue, indicating that the two were at extremely close range when he was shot. Zimmerman has claimed self-defense all along, and these facts back him up. No wonder the Leftmedia has lost interest in the case.

[SANDMAN5]

Can't really say I'm "glad" because it doesn't change the fact that at least
two families lives have been changed forever. But I am glad that the media
might be taking one on the chin!! (Unless more "facts" come out.....again)

[big d]

according to cnn the injuries to martins knuckles were indicative of someone fighting for their life..

[Serk]

someone fighting for their life..

They talking about Zimmerman/Martin, or their own fight to remain relevant as their bias is becoming more and more obvious?

[Skinhead]

according to cnn the injuries to martins knuckles were indicative of someone fighting for their life..

WTF does that mean????  And how did CNN determine this??

[steve 3054]

CNN  =   Clinton News Network

[Prometheus]

I'm confused about the self defense part? I've always been a big proponent of "don't start no trouble, won't be no trouble". I'm just saying...

[Chiefy]

Zimmerman's gun was giving him balls, so he chose to look for trouble.  He found it, couldn't handle it, and killed a kid that was a better fighter then himself.  

It's not like they brushed up against each other on the sidewalk.  Zimmerman got out and confronted him.  Most of us here would not tolerate a cop doing that to us, let alone a civilian.

[Jeff K]

In what state in this country does a verbal altercation justify physical violence?
Why do people keep coming around to this "Zimmerman should have stayed in his car" "Zimmerman shouldn't have followed him"
Why? Why would he have been required to keep his distance from anyone else? Why is he not allowed to confront ANYONE? This line of thinking is bizarre. If you are walking in your neighborhood and you see someone, anyone, are you now required by law to run the other way?

Why are those that say Zimmerman shouldn't have followed not saying that Treyvon should have never doubled back? Why does Treyvon have a right to go confront someone that is following him, but Zimmerman doesn't have the right to wonder "who is this and why is he here"?

Where in the United States is it illegal to "follow" someone?
On the other hand I do believe it is illegal in the state of Florida to beat the piss out of someone for "looking at them".

When Zimmerman told the dispatcher, not 911 like all the people that think they have "the facts" keep saying, "he looks like he is high or something" HE WAS RIGHT!

and as some of us know, smoking dope NEVER makes you paranoid. 

When is the "proper" time to defend yourself? Do you really expect me to wait till my second to the last breath of air I am allowed to take?

[cookiedough]

I never resort to violence UNLESS someone for real hits me first.  Then and only then do I have a right to beat the living daylights out of someone.  Dad always said I never want to see myself start a fight but he would always defend me if I had to finish what someone else started and I to this day 100% agree.  The now dead guy on drugs probably tried beating up on him and he defended himself the only way he had with a gun unfortunately. 

[Chrisj CMA]

In what state in this country does a verbal altercation justify physical violence?
Why do people keep coming around to this "Zimmerman should have stayed in his car" "Zimmerman shouldn't have followed him"
Why? Why would he have been required to keep his distance from anyone else? Why is he not allowed to confront ANYONE? This line of thinking is bizarre. If you are walking in your neighborhood and you see someone, anyone, are you now required by law to run the other way?

Why are those that say Zimmerman shouldn't have followed not saying that Treyvon should have never doubled back? Why does Treyvon have a right to go confront someone that is following him, but Zimmerman doesn't have the right to wonder "who is this and why is he here"?

Where in the United States is it illegal to "follow" someone?
On the other hand I do believe it is illegal in the state of Florida to beat the piss out of someone for "looking at them".

When Zimmerman told the dispatcher, not 911 like all the people that think they have "the facts" keep saying, "he looks like he is high or something" HE WAS RIGHT!

and as some of us know, smoking dope NEVER makes you paranoid. 

When is the "proper" time to defend yourself? Do you really expect me to wait till my second to the last breath of air I am allowed to take?

Jeff, you hit it right on the nail I would have.........I feel the same, I also feel Zimmerman will walk, and


WATCH OUT if that happens there will be more violence

[Willow]

I'm confused about the self defense part? I've always been a big proponent of "don't start no trouble, won't be no trouble". I'm just saying...

Zimmerman's gun was giving him balls, so he chose to look for trouble.  He found it, couldn't handle it, and killed a kid that was a better fighter then himself.  
It's not like they brushed up against each other on the sidewalk.  Zimmerman got out and confronted him.  Most of us here would not tolerate a cop doing that to us, let alone a civilian.

I'd be interested in knowing what reports you fellows have read on the incident.  I haven't seen anything that indicated Zimmerman had confronted Martin.  In fact, everything I'd read indicated that Zimmerman was doing exactly what would have been expected of him as a neighborhood watch captain.

I strongly suspect that if the truth ever does actually come out regarding this event it will confirm that each of these individualks was exactly what the other suspected he was.

[Paxton]

Frankly,
In this case as in others, I really do not give much thought to who was the aggressor, why did Zimmerman felt
so compelled to follow the kid, who threw the first punch; etc.

I can only imagine the fear and horror of seen a gun pointed at you must cause. I think I'd be frantic doing whatever it takes to survive,
even if I am clearly committing a crime.

At any rate, I have no opinion on the matter. I just think it was a tragedy. My sense is that guilty or not, Zimmerman wishes that
the event had never occurred. A sad fact of life... and death.
 

[PAVALKER]

In what state in this country does a verbal altercation justify physical violence?
Why do people keep coming around to this "Zimmerman should have stayed in his car" "Zimmerman shouldn't have followed him"
Why? Why would he have been required to keep his distance from anyone else? Why is he not allowed to confront ANYONE? This line of thinking is bizarre. If you are walking in your neighborhood and you see someone, anyone, are you now required by law to run the other way?

Why are those that say Zimmerman shouldn't have followed not saying that Treyvon should have never doubled back? Why does Treyvon have a right to go confront someone that is following him, but Zimmerman doesn't have the right to wonder "who is this and why is he here"?

Where in the United States is it illegal to "follow" someone?
On the other hand I do believe it is illegal in the state of Florida to beat the piss out of someone for "looking at them".

When Zimmerman told the dispatcher, not 911 like all the people that think they have "the facts" keep saying, "he looks like he is high or something" HE WAS RIGHT!

and as some of us know, smoking dope NEVER makes you paranoid. 

When is the "proper" time to defend yourself? Do you really expect me to wait till my second to the last breath of air I am allowed to take?

I agree.... and while I hope that Zimmerman will be found NOT guilty, I can't be quite sure that will happen, even with all the evidence.

[Momz]

Wonder what the new Back Panthers have to say?
I'd venture to assume that whatever the facts, they still want Zimmerman dead.

[Davemn]

Let the trial play out. Until then, our opinions mean nothing.
CNN...fighting for his life.......too funny.

[musclehead]

I'm confused about the self defense part? I've always been a big proponent of "don't start no trouble, won't be no trouble". I'm just saying...

(not to be construed as the facts in the case thus far) if someone has you pinned on the ground and are beating the crap out of you and you really think this might be it, so you pull your piece and pop the antagonist in the chest.  

qualifies as 'self defense'.

I am a peace lover and have never had the kind of trouble coming Zimmerman's way, I steer clear of bad areas, and will only 'stick my nose in' if it warrants it. ie; a defenseless person getting beat down.

[musclehead]

Zimmerman's gun was giving him balls, so he chose to look for trouble.  He found it, couldn't handle it, and killed a kid that was a better fighter then himself.  

It's not like they brushed up against each other on the sidewalk.  Zimmerman got out and confronted him.  Most of us here would not tolerate a cop doing that to us, let alone a civilian.

hold the phone you don't know, and neither do I what happened that night. Zimmerman got out and followed Martin, that is not a crime. he thought Martin was up to no good, and called 911. from some of the maps it looks like Martin turned around and came back after Zimmerman.  what happened at that point we only have Zimmerman's version for obvouis reasons. a witness reported "Z" on the ground getting the tar beat out of him by "M".  and that is where we leave it for the court to decide.

[musclehead]

Frankly,
In this case as in others, I really do not give much thought to who was the aggressor, why did Zimmerman felt
so compelled to follow the kid, who threw the first punch; etc.

I can only imagine the fear and horror of seen a gun pointed at you must cause. I think I'd be frantic doing whatever it takes to survive,
even if I am clearly committing a crime.

At any rate, I have no opinion on the matter. I just think it was a tragedy. My sense is that guilty or not, Zimmerman wishes that
the event had never occurred. A sad fact of life... and death.
 

I for once agree, you can't call back your lead once fired. maybe there should be two watch people on duty, keeps the potential bad folks at bay if there's more then one.

[Skinhead]

Zimmerman wishes that
the event had never occurred. A sad fact of life... and death.
 

I'm shocked!  I believe this is the first thing you ever said that I agree with.

[Paxton]

Skinhead;
You are finally coming to your senses! 

[musclehead]

nevermind 

[texaninsouthfl]

according to cnn the injuries to martins knuckles were indicative of someone fighting for their life..

Yeah, exactly... Martin's knuckles were defending themselves from Zimmerman's face.

The lamestream, yellow media are contorting themselves into pretzels trying to spin the evidence in a manner that somehow absolves them from the egregious dishonesty they've displayed in how they've portrayed this story. What a bunch of scumbags.

[9Ball]

The prosecutor is going after 2nd degree murder which will never stick, especially in light of the information (evidence?) that came out this week.  The outcome after "Z" is found not guilty of 2nd degree murder will be riots, burning, and looting....just an opportunity for the thugs.  This will be Rodney King lawlessness multiplied.

YMMV

[alph]

Zimmerman's gun was giving him balls, so he chose to look for trouble.  He found it, couldn't handle it, and killed a kid that was a better fighter then himself.  

Hate to say it, but that's one reason why i'm not a 100% behind wisconsin's new concealed carry law.  Too many idiots out there now that have the right to carry a gun willing to whip it out for anything.  don't think it would be that big of a deal, but drinking is a right of passage here in wisconsin, and we all know what a little 12oz can of courage can do......

as for zimmerman, all he had to do was watch, not follow and definitely not confront.  if anything, why didn't zimmerman carry a camera instead of a gun?  having video will assist a police officer more then a gun ever would.  you can buy a hell of a good video camera for the same price as a gun, plus more people are camera shy then you can imagine!!

[Chiefy]

In what state in this country does a verbal altercation justify physical violence?
Why do people keep coming around to this "Zimmerman should have stayed in his car" "Zimmerman shouldn't have followed him"
Why? Why would he have been required to keep his distance from anyone else? Why is he not allowed to confront ANYONE? This line of thinking is bizarre. If you are walking in your neighborhood and you see someone, anyone, are you now required by law to run the other way?

Why are those that say Zimmerman shouldn't have followed not saying that Treyvon should have never doubled back? Why does Treyvon have a right to go confront someone that is following him, but Zimmerman doesn't have the right to wonder "who is this and why is he here"?

Where in the United States is it illegal to "follow" someone?
On the other hand I do believe it is illegal in the state of Florida to beat the piss out of someone for "looking at them".

When Zimmerman told the dispatcher, not 911 like all the people that think they have "the facts" keep saying, "he looks like he is high or something" HE WAS RIGHT!

and as some of us know, smoking dope NEVER makes you paranoid. 

When is the "proper" time to defend yourself? Do you really expect me to wait till my second to the last breath of air I am allowed to take?

I guess you're responding to me, not sure since you didn't quote or mention my name.  You bring up valid points. 

However, the kid told his girlfriend that he knew that the guy was following him, and did not know why.  Then she heard the verbal confrontation "Why are you following me?"  "What are you doing here!?"  I don't know you or anything about you.  But I'd be willing to wager sight unseen that if you were aware you were being followed, and that person got in your face about what are you doing here, you'd be fearful, angry, perhaps both.  And in my book, the person getting in your face would be instigating things intentionally.  Talk is cheap.  But if you read through the comments in general around here long enough,  you might come to the conclusion that many here would have popped Zimmerman if they were in the kid's shoes.  The girlfriend also heard an "oof" sound like when air gets pushed out of your lungs when you're shoved in the chest.  We don't know who pushed who.  But there is a 50/50 chance Zimmerman did.  And if so the boy right in defending himself.

We don't know the kid was high.  He had traces of grass in his system, but there is no way to tell if it was current, or left over from days ago.  And walking at night being fearful when you realize you're being followed, then confronted is hardly paranoid in my unprofessional opinion.

I know nothing of neighborhood watch programs, but  I have to wonder if confrontation after notifying authorities is the norm.  And according to the media, no watch programs allow for carrying firearms.

Zimmerman was an adult, the boy was a minor.   Zimmerman made a bad choice.  Things went wrong and a kid is dead.   I challenge you to produce any weapons class (for the general public not LEO or military) that advocates getting out in front of a suspected troublemaker and confronting him.


Zimmerman gets his day in court.  I'm a firm believer in trial by jury, and that every case is unique.  If he  is innocent, then so be it.  All we have is what the media is telling us, and now the police papers.  We all have life experience which filters how we view things.  My filter tells me Zimmerman saw a smaller person,  and decided to go out and swagger as if he had some type of authority.   Did the kid start the physical stuff?  Is so, was it because he had a gun pulled on him?  Since there are no eye witnesses that saw the whole thing, we'll never know.

[Chiefy]

Zimmerman's gun was giving him balls, so he chose to look for trouble.  He found it, couldn't handle it, and killed a kid that was a better fighter then himself.  

Hate to say it, but that's one reason why i'm not a 100% behind wisconsin's new concealed carry law.  Too many idiots out there now that have the right to carry a gun willing to whip it out for anything.  don't think it would be that big of a deal, but drinking is a right of passage here in wisconsin, and we all know what a little 12oz can of courage can do......

as for zimmerman, all he had to do was watch, not follow and definitely not confront.  if anything, why didn't zimmerman carry a camera instead of a gun?  having video will assist a police officer more then a gun ever would.  you can buy a hell of a good video camera for the same price as a gun, plus more people are camera shy then you can imagine!!

Early on, when states were starting to allow more concealed carry, I was envisioning shoot outs in the supermarket parking lot.  That hasn't happened, and I'm glad to see that the vast-vast majority of gun owners have a level head on their shoulders.   But there are always going to be "The shakiest gun in the west" types that scare easily and buy a weapon thinking that will cure it.  I think Zimmerman may fall into that category. 

[Valker]

If, indeed, Zimmerman was on the ground with the other guy on top beating him, that constitutes life threatening. You don't defend yourself by putting a person on the ground, climbing on top of them, and pummeling their face. I'd have used something to get him off of me also. Following someone is NOT life threatening. Getting in someone's face (either way) is NOT life threatening. A fist fight is NOT necessarily life threatening.

[Jeff K]

If, indeed, Zimmerman was on the ground with the other guy on top beating him, that constitutes life threatening. You don't defend yourself by putting a person on the ground, climbing on top of them, and pummeling their face. I'd have used something to get him off of me also. Following someone is NOT life threatening. Getting in someone's face (either way) is NOT life threatening. A fist fight is NOT necessarily life threatening.

But if he would have spent his money on a nice video camera instead of a gun he could have recorded his own beating and death. And Treyvon would have had himself a new camera.
 

[f6john]

Was this truly a "gated community"? If it was/is, would not someone who doesn't reside there not be too surprised if they are approached or confronted? Does the average citizen have the right to go "anywhere" they please without some expectation someone might question their presence?

[Chiefy]

If, indeed, Zimmerman was on the ground with the other guy on top beating him, that constitutes life threatening. You don't defend yourself by putting a person on the ground, climbing on top of them, and pummeling their face. I'd have used something to get him off of me also. Following someone is NOT life threatening. Getting in someone's face (either way) is NOT life threatening. A fist fight is NOT necessarily life threatening.

But if he would have spent his money on a nice video camera instead of a gun he could have recorded his own beating and death. And Treyvon would have had himself a new camera.
 

What's the "winky" for?

[Chiefy]

If, indeed, Zimmerman was on the ground with the other guy on top beating him, that constitutes life threatening. You don't defend yourself by putting a person on the ground, climbing on top of them, and pummeling their face. I'd have used something to get him off of me also. Following someone is NOT life threatening. Getting in someone's face (either way) is NOT life threatening. A fist fight is NOT necessarily life threatening.

What if (??) Zimerman had already drawn his gun, and in a panic all the kid could think to do was pound away?  After the fact so many can calmly say he should have run, or not fought back.  Having had a gun in my nose once, I can tell you a common civilian is not thinking calmly with a gun on him.  No matter what he says ahead of time.

"Tough guys" (not referring to you) always brag about how they don't start fights, but they end them.  Yeah, until something like this happens, then the law is held up (conveniently) in highest regard.  

[musclehead]

If, indeed, Zimmerman was on the ground with the other guy on top beating him, that constitutes life threatening. You don't defend yourself by putting a person on the ground, climbing on top of them, and pummeling their face. I'd have used something to get him off of me also. Following someone is NOT life threatening. Getting in someone's face (either way) is NOT life threatening. A fist fight is NOT necessarily life threatening.

What if (??) Zimerman had already drawn his gun, and in a panic all the kid could think to do was pound away?  After the fact so many can calmly say he should have run, or not fought back.  Having had a gun in my nose once, I can tell you a common civilian is not thinking calmly with a gun on him.  No matter what he says ahead of time.

"Tough guys" (not referring to you) always brag about how they don't start fights, but they end them.  Yeah, until something like this happens, then the law is held up (conveniently) in highest regard.  

what if Martin threw the first punch and kept on pummeling?

lots of 'what if's" we don't know we weren't there and we can speculate back and forth.

I'm pretty sure the prosecutors have set the bar too high AGAIN (ala the Anthony trial) but we'll see.

[Chiefy]

If, indeed, Zimmerman was on the ground with the other guy on top beating him, that constitutes life threatening. You don't defend yourself by putting a person on the ground, climbing on top of them, and pummeling their face. I'd have used something to get him off of me also. Following someone is NOT life threatening. Getting in someone's face (either way) is NOT life threatening. A fist fight is NOT necessarily life threatening.

What if (??) Zimerman had already drawn his gun, and in a panic all the kid could think to do was pound away?  After the fact so many can calmly say he should have run, or not fought back.  Having had a gun in my nose once, I can tell you a common civilian is not thinking calmly with a gun on him.  No matter what he says ahead of time.

"Tough guys" (not referring to you) always brag about how they don't start fights, but they end them.  Yeah, until something like this happens, then the law is held up (conveniently) in highest regard.  

what if Martin threw the first punch and kept on pummeling?

lots of 'what if's" we don't know we weren't there and we can speculate back and forth.

I'm pretty sure the prosecutors have set the bar too high AGAIN (ala the Anthony trial) but we'll see.

Yes, lot's of what-ifs.  I was responding to the what if Zimmerman were just a peace loving good samaritain that became unavoidably involved in a life or death situation.

[Paxton]

For the Pot Heads out there, do we know of anyone who smoked a full joint, he is now higher than a kite and
goes around looking for trouble?  I never heard of such an event.
If you have, then the Dude is smoking some low quality contaminated stuff.  
Moreover, if he had smoked contaminated weed, or had mixed it with some other drug, it would have shown on
the drug-screening panel that found the Marijuana in his system in the first place.  ???

If you are not / never were a Pot head and believe that Marijuana in your system would cause you to go around
confronting or attacking people with or without provocation, you might be confusing Weed with PCP.  
Weed is a relaxing drug, which calms you down, unlike PCP, arguably Alcohol and some other dangerous drugs.

If you are physically defending yourself from someone who is high on Pot, your chances of kicking his ass increases.
That's not to say that if you are high on Marijuana you would not be able to fight back and defend yourself.

Yes in fact, I've regularly smoked Marijuana for the past 40 years. I do not recall ever starting or participating
in a fight because of it.

Coming to think of it, my one and only fist fight ever was back in 7th grade when I did not know what Pot was.
I was just desperately getting the school's bully off of  me.   I still got my ass kicked tho.

[Trynt]

Zimmerman's gun was giving him balls, so he chose to look for trouble.   

.

Wow! Mind reader and shrink!
Just more useless speculation. It's must be the MSNBC talking.

[WamegoRob]

why didn't zimmerman carry a camera instead of a gun?

If I were a criminal I'd likely run from a gun pointed at me, but I'd just beat you and steal the camera.

Luckily for camera owners everywhere, I'm not a criminal   

[fudgie]

why didn't zimmerman carry a camera instead of a gun?

If I were a criminal I'd likely run from a gun pointed at me, but I'd just beat you and steal the camera.

Luckily for camera owners everywhere, I'm not a criminal   

[Chiefy]

Zimmerman's gun was giving him balls, so he chose to look for trouble.   

.

Wow! Mind reader and shrink!
Just more useless speculation. It's must be the MSNBC talking.

We're allowed to speculate all we want.  All we're doing is "kicking it around the water cooler."  I don't know who the heck you think you might be, but it's me talking, not some media outlet.

[Paxton]

Trynt;
Don't mess with MSNBC; I love Morning Joe and Mika is Hot, isn't she?