trayvan martin

UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
desert dude said:
Poor UB. On the losing side of yet another argument, shouting unfounded assertions that are contradicted by the police report and an eye witness. Zimmer walks. What he did was remarkably dumb, but legal under the law.
Click to expand...
wow, i'm sure you have a long history of defending police reports. like when they bust someone with 100 pounds and claim that they kept a street value of $5,000,000 worth of pot off the streets.

you're an idiot to believe that anything in that report resembles even remotely what actually happened that night.

there is zero evidence that zimmerman was assaulted, that he did not exhaust all possible escape options is inarguably true, and as carne pointed out, there is no way you shoot someone in their chest while on your back and walk away without a spot of blood on you.

tell me how saintly those cops are again, desert dude?

LOL!
 
B

bundee1

Well-Known Member
cliffey501 said:
failing back to insults again thats nice.you called me a cracker? is this a hate crime? and what protocols are you even talking about?the neighboorhood watch protocols? because as someone mentioned he wasnt a member of any registered neighborhood watch groups.He was simply a concerned citizen.
Click to expand...
So he had no authority to confront him and antagonize Trayvon into a situation where armed conflict and murder are the only outcome? Way to contradict yourself and destroy Zimmermans defense.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
desert dude said:
I agree that eye witness are unreliable, even notoriously so, but they are admissible as evidence. In this case the eye witness account is corroborated by the observations of the responding policeman and documented in the policeman's written report. Zimmer walks.

GAME SET MATCH... unless some other actual evidence emerges.
Click to expand...
so, what you mean to say is that a notoriously unreliable eyewitness account was corroborated by a police report from a joke of a police force who "corrected" other people's accounts?

wow! you don't say!

the eyewitness account will be thrown out and the police report will rightly be drawn into question.
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
lol, now stoners are defending police reports. the police report doesn't mean shit when they coached other people into making the statements they wanted.

eyewitness accounts are all but meaningless in a court of law.

no pictures or any evidence whatsoever of any injuries, no assault ever happened. period.
Click to expand...
UB, I understand that you have taken a passionate position on this whole incident and that it is hard to back away from a passionate position, but you are starting to sound more than a little bit stupid. I urge you, for the good of your reputation here on RIU, take an objective look at what little evidence we have available and at the law for which you so helpfully provided a link.

Zimmer walks.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
desert dude said:
UB, I understand that you have taken a passionate position on this whole incident and that it is hard to back away from a passionate position, but you are starting to sound more than a little bit stupid. I urge you, for the good of your reputation here on RIU, take an objective look at what little evidence we have available and at the law for which you so helpfully provided a link.

Zimmer walks.
Click to expand...
so little substance.

care to show me a picture of that "great bodily harm" zimmerman was perfectly able to escape from?

:dunce:

keep defending police reports, see how quickly that makes you look retarded.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
desert dude said:
UB, I understand that you have taken a passionate position on this whole incident and that it is hard to back away from a passionate position, but you are starting to sound more than a little bit stupid. I urge you, for the good of your reputation here on RIU, take an objective look at what little evidence we have available and at the law for which you so helpfully provided a link.

Zimmer walks.
Click to expand...
Oh so much will depend on the forensic workup of the scene. I agree that Zimmerman might walk from a criminal charge. But I'll bet my last can of mildly smoked baby seal that Z will get his hide handed to him in the follow-up civil suit. cn
 
B

bundee1

Well-Known Member
I just watched 5 NJ Transit officers harrass the hell out of a minority dude because he had spent too much time in the Trenton train station. LOL! They surrounded him with their hands on their weapons and asked him why he was in the station for so long. They asked him to produce a ticket, which he did, then kept pulling the guys earbuds out of his ears to tell him he either better get on a train or leave the station. They ran his ID and it came back clean. They guy looked a little baked or high but was just sitting there listening to music. He got up to take a walk around the station. I watched the whole thing and it seems they got nervous. Then they proceeded to pretend they werent watching him as he sat down again and they surrounded him again and had a bullshit conversation about candy they liked. Fucking clowns. The guy had no weapons or even a bag. Just sitting there waiting for a train.

As the the great Slick Rick said "This type of shit happens everyday".
 
MuyLocoNC

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
there is zero evidence that zimmerman was assaulted in any way. neighbors reported seeing him standing nonchalantly over the guy he murdered. not a single picture of zimmerman supposed bloody nose (boy, that's great bodily harm, isn't it?) or his supposedly grass stained shirt (grass stains? well clearly, that proves he was in danger of great bodily harm!).
Click to expand...
How is an eyewitness not evidence? That's zero now?

only one anonymous eyewitness has said that, other witnesses contradict him and also report that the police tried to "correct" their statements to fit the narrative you cling to (despite an equal amount of evidence in the opposite direction).
Click to expand...
The problem is I'm not acquitting him OR convicting him, you are. As I made VERY clear, Zim is most likely at fault. However, at this moment noone has enough information to say anything definitively. Calling for sanity and letting the facts come out, versus putting out Wanted Dead or Alive notices is apparently enough to say you are "defending" someone. I'm not clinging to anything, you're making assumptions.


zimmerman pursued martin is what happened, which is not covered in the justifiable use of force statute. you lose your protection when you initially provoke the situation like that.

he didn't simply speak to him as he entered the neighborhood, he followed him around. he pursued martin. you do lose your ability to claim self defense in that case, with two exceptions outlined in the law: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html
Click to expand...
Were you there? Do you have PROOF that he didn't just walk up to the young man and talk to him? I want to see it or hear it because you guys keep saying he did something wrong by merely speaking to him. I happen to know for a fact that initiating a conversation with someone does not remove your rights to self defense. You have no proof he "PROVOKED" anything more than a civil conversation. Or do YOU? And I mean proof not more conjecture. You guys constantly demand it left and right so I'm holding you to the same standard... I want PROOF he did more than speak in a polite tone to him. I already know you don't so enough with the "provoked" bullshit, until it's proven.


not at all. the question will be whether zimmerman "exhausted every possible means of escape", which we already know is not the case due to the location of the murder.
Click to expand...
We know nothing at all. It's conjecture. What if all Zimmerman did was go up to him and ask him for a light in an effort to see who he was? It's unlikely, but at this stage and based on the available information it's every bit as plausible as your fictitious claim that he "provoked" the attack. Do you KNOW that's not EXACTLY what happened? You sure don't. So, enough with the guilty verdict and claims of racism and such. Are you probably right, yeah, I already said that.

The problem for the people that think this is the smoking gun to repeal the SYG laws is that the whole situation is a catch-22 for that argument. If Zimmerman is guilty and provoked everything or just flat killed the kid for no reason, the SYG law will not protect him so it's not even part of the discussion. If by some miracle it comes out that Trayvan was completely at fault, instigated an attack with no justification and temporarily lost his mind and tried to beat the guy to death, then the SYG law will kick in and Zimm will walk. Either way, the SYG law will continue as it should.
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
so little substance.

care to show me a picture of that "great bodily harm" zimmerman was perfectly able to escape from?

:dunce:

keep defending police reports, see how quickly that makes you look retarded.
Click to expand...

Poor UB, you have a big mouthful of a losing argument here and you just can't bring yourself to spit it out.

Trayvon's death is a tragedy, that is clear, and I take no delight in that at all. What does delight me though is watching UB flounder with a stupid argument, and using the link to the law that you provided to provide a clear and convincing defense of Zimmer. Thanks, UB :-)!!!
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Oh so much will depend on the forensic workup of the scene. I agree that Zimmerman might walk from a criminal charge. But I'll bet my last can of mildly smoked baby seal that Z will get his hide handed to him in the follow-up civil suit. cn
Click to expand...
You could be right about that, but that is not the point of this very long thread.
 
C

cliffey501

Active Member
bundee1 said:
I just watched 5 NJ Transit officers harrass the hell out of a minority dude because he had spent too much time in the Trenton train station. LOL! They surrounded him with their hands on their weapons and asked him why he was in the station for so long. They asked him to produce a ticket, which he did, then kept pulling the guys earbuds out of his ears to tell him he either better get on a train or leave the station. They ran his ID and it came back clean. They guy looked a little baked or high but was just sitting there listening to music. He got up to take a walk around the station. I watched the whole thing and it seems they got nervous. Then they proceeded to pretend they werent watching him as he sat down again and they surrounded him again and had a bullshit conversation about candy they liked. Fucking clowns. The guy had no weapons or even a bag. Just sitting there waiting for a train.

As the the great Slick Rick said "This type of shit happens everyday".
Click to expand...
So you say yourself the guy looked high or a little baked? Tell me why the the transit officers shouldn't approach him? You also say this guy spent too much time a a train station ? Maybe they suspected him loitering?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
MuyLocoNC said:
How is an eyewitness not evidence? That's zero now?
Click to expand...
i would bet the house and farm that the defense injects reasonable doubt into the eyewitness account. it's worthless, especially since the police were "correcting" other people's accounts, rather than just writing down what they said.

MuyLocoNC said:
Were you there? Do you have PROOF that he didn't just walk up to the young man and talk to him? I want to see it or hear it because you guys keep saying he did something wrong by merely speaking to him. ...You have no proof he "PROVOKED" anything more than a civil conversation. Or do YOU?
Click to expand...
the 9/11 tapes prove he was not just sparking up a conversation about the weather, zimmerman himself twice said he was pursuing the guy. then there is the phone records from when he was talking to his girlfriend. he pursued. nothing would have happened had zimemrman simply called the cops and sat back. he was the initial provoker.

MuyLocoNC said:
If by some miracle it comes out that Trayvan was completely at fault, instigated an attack with no justification and temporarily lost his mind and tried to beat the guy to death...
Click to expand...
how can he be at fault for walking home from the store?

lulz.

if zimmerman stood his ground instead of pursuing, the result would have been that trayvon ate a bag of skittles.
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Hey guys, don't rely on evidence or people who saw what happened, just ask UB, he knows what happened, he has a fucking crystal ball.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
"i would bet the house and farm that the defense injects reasonable doubt into the eyewitness account. it's worthless, especially since the police were "correcting" other people's accounts, rather than just writing down what they said."

Take a breath, UB, and catch your bearings. The "defense" here will be representing Zimmer; they have no reason to "inject reasonable doubt" about the eye witness.

The prosecutor, if there is ever a charge, is going to have a very difficult time convincing a jury of this: Did Zimmer have no reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm? He was on his back taking a beating and that fact is corroborated by a policeman and an eyewitness. If a jury cannot be convinced that Zimmer had no reasonable fear, then Zimmer walks. The best a prosecutor could hope for in a case like this is a hung jury. Now, if more evidence emerges things could change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top