Trayvon Martin - Page 12

Warborn · 2012-03-30, 08:42 PM

The police report said he was bleeding from the nose and the back of the head. It does not make any claims about the severity of the bleedings or the size of the wound. The claim that the nose was broken and the head required stitches came from Zimmerman's lawyer, prior to the video of Zimmerman being released. It is apparent that whatever injuries Zimmerman sustained, they did not require treatment by paramedics, as there are no dressings and the wounds had both not bled enough to stain his clothing, nor were they still bleeding when Zimmerman was taken to the police station several minutes later.

The question you should be asking (and the one that is far more relevant) is whether those injuries were self-inflicted.

Martin's hands displayed no signs of having been used to beat a man for a minute and break a nose with a punch.

**Malorn** · 2012-03-30, 09:14 PM

Meh.

Warborn · 2012-03-30, 09:21 PM

Yes, Martin's hands showing no signs of violence and Zimmerman's face showing no signs of injury. We clearly have no evidence that Zimmerman was or was not severely beaten by Martin. It's a total coin-toss. It is me, I am the one who needs lessons in logic.

Traak · 2012-03-31, 01:57 AM

Interesting that the police have access to all the evidence, the responsibility to do anything if there was wrongdoing, and they aren't.

So, either they are all corrupt, or perhaps it WAS self-defense.

ArcIyte · 2012-03-31, 02:42 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

That does not mean he did not do so.

Edit: I'm tired of giving Warborn lessons in logical reasoning. I'm done with this thread. The courts will sort it out.

BUT HIS HANDS

WildGunsTomcat · 2012-03-31, 12:17 PM

http://content.bitsontherun.com/prev...NjJha-svqBtzyp

I'm just gonna leave this link here.

It's Piers Morgan...a British Man....ripping a black reporter apart for trying and convicting George Zimmerman without there even being a trial yet.

"But you haven't lived here long enough, you just don't understand the YEARS of hurt against the black man in America..."

Piers: "Pfft yeah okay you hack."

Watch it, good stuff.

Also: Let the courts decide this, I personally think he was justified...but we'll see IF it goes to trial. And that's a HUGE if.

Figment · 2012-03-31, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

Also: Let the courts decide this, I personally think he was justified...but we'll see IF it goes to trial. And that's a HUGE if.

That's basically the point. It is certain that Zimmerman killed Martin by his own admittance and all evidence (gun fired, bullet, etc).

The question is whether or not it was justifiable self-defense or alterior motives played a role, as well as whether or not Zimmerman was the actual aggressor, instigator or provocator in the incident.

So it is not that there is no evidence that Zimmerman shot Martin, it is the question of 'why'. If there are doubts about the motivation that it may be more than self-defense or provoked by Zimmerman's actions, then that is more than enough reason to press charges and go to court.

Touré may be prejudiced and as a journalist that's a bad quality. I can understand where Touré is coming from (historical social inferiority complex and history of racial violence), but he is jumping to conclusions.

Do note: we are merely speculating in this thread whether or not it is the case and it will remain speculation since we will not have full evidence and ar reliant on just the information passed in any media. I personally have not asserted that Zimmeran actually acted on racial motives, just that there's a case to be made based on the interpretation of the tapes. I've argued from that perspective, considering there are plenty that did the opposite and I'd say it's not an extremely unlikely scenario. From what I understand from those jumping to the defense of Zimmerman, it's often from a motivation to protect that law, rather than Zimmerman. if the law is flawed though, then it is in the public interest to hold it up for scrutiny.
In some cases I sense an undertone of frustration with certain crime, the gangsta culture and with it, identification with Zimmerman. That too is understandable, but still no justification.

So the same bias argument can be said for anyone jumping to Zimmerman's defense by default and I'm quite sure Pierce would utterly rip those apart as well. In fact, saw a small part of him interviewing the brother of Zimmerman yesterday on CNN as well as the lawyer representing Martin. He looks at both sides of the argument and as a Brit is neutral.

Same for Obama really, I don't get why he - and other US presidents and politicians - regularly make judgmental personal opinion comments on such incidents. As a politician and worse, representative of the non-biased state, your job is not to act as defense attorney nor prosecution but a representative of the people. Especially since you have trial by jury, the influence from high profile, public figures when making statements is not beneficial to the fairness of the trial.

Still, it should come to a trial.

Warborn · 2012-03-31, 03:27 PM

It's clear that Zimmerman lied about what happened to police, and that the Sanford PD themselves grossly mishandled the case. On that basis alone I'd think it does warrant a more thorough investigation, which is supposedly underway as we speak. On top of that, thanks to idiots like the Black Panthers and Spike Lee, offering bounties for Zimmerman's capture and twittering about where Zimmerman is supposedly hidden (when really it's an innocent, elderly couple who then receive death threats) I think there really needs to be a trial, if only because there are enough crazy people seeking Zimmerman's death despite there being no conviction that Zimmerman probably wouldn't be able to lead a normal, safe life if this is just left hanging.

Vash02 · 2012-03-31, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

http://content.bitsontherun.com/prev...NjJha-svqBtzyp

I'm just gonna leave this link here.

It's Piers Morgan...a British Man....ripping a black reporter apart for trying and convicting George Zimmerman without there even being a trial yet.

"But you haven't lived here long enough, you just don't understand the YEARS of hurt against the black man in America..."

Piers: "Pfft yeah okay you hack."

Watch it, good stuff.

Also: Let the courts decide this, I personally think he was justified...but we'll see IF it goes to trial. And that's a HUGE if.

Coming from the man who made it his profession for years in convicting people before their trials its a bit rich.

P.S. Keep the treasonous bastard.
Signed,
Britain xx.

WildGunsTomcat · 2012-03-31, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

That's basically the point. It is certain that Zimmerman killed Martin by his own admittance and all evidence (gun fired, bullet, etc).

The question is whether or not it was justifiable self-defense or alterior motives played a role, as well as whether or not Zimmerman was the actual aggressor, instigator or provocator in the incident.

So it is not that there is no evidence that Zimmerman shot Martin, it is the question of 'why'. If there are doubts about the motivation that it may be more than self-defense or provoked by Zimmerman's actions, then that is more than enough reason to press charges and go to court.

Touré may be prejudiced and as a journalist that's a bad quality. I can understand where Touré is coming from (historical social inferiority complex and history of racial violence), but he is jumping to conclusions.

Do note: we are merely speculating in this thread whether or not it is the case and it will remain speculation since we will not have full evidence and ar reliant on just the information passed in any media. I personally have not asserted that Zimmeran actually acted on racial motives, just that there's a case to be made based on the interpretation of the tapes. I've argued from that perspective, considering there are plenty that did the opposite and I'd say it's not an extremely unlikely scenario. From what I understand from those jumping to the defense of Zimmerman, it's often from a motivation to protect that law, rather than Zimmerman. if the law is flawed though, then it is in the public interest to hold it up for scrutiny.
In some cases I sense an undertone of frustration with certain crime, the gangsta culture and with it, identification with Zimmerman. That too is understandable, but still no justification.

So the same bias argument can be said for anyone jumping to Zimmerman's defense by default and I'm quite sure Pierce would utterly rip those apart as well. In fact, saw a small part of him interviewing the brother of Zimmerman yesterday on CNN as well as the lawyer representing Martin. He looks at both sides of the argument and as a Brit is neutral.

Same for Obama really, I don't get why he - and other US presidents and politicians - regularly make judgmental personal opinion comments on such incidents. As a politician and worse, representative of the non-biased state, your job is not to act as defense attorney nor prosecution but a representative of the people. Especially since you have trial by jury, the influence from high profile, public figures when making statements is not beneficial to the fairness of the trial.

Still, it should come to a trial.

For once Figment, you and I are in total agreement.

What bothers me fundamentally about this, is that he has been tried and convicted in the court of public opinion...without having all the facts.

That's fucked up.

Also, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are using this situation to incite racism.

Just look at this:

13 shot, 2 dead in Chicago by 'Hoodies' in Rep. Rush's District

When does it end?

Another thing I take issue with, is this kid gets shot....

But in Kansas City...a white kid is almost burned to death by black racists because the kid's last name is 'Coon'....almost ZERO fucking media attention.

Sauce for that story

Even More Sauce for that Story

Then, Obama......

Oh God don't get me started on that jackass.

Vecha · 2012-04-01, 01:17 AM

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

For once Figment, you and I are in total agreement.

What bothers me fundamentally about this, is that he has been tried and convicted in the court of public opinion...without having all the facts.

That's fucked up.

Also, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are using this situation to incite racism.

Just look at this:

13 shot, 2 dead in Chicago by 'Hoodies' in Rep. Rush's District

When does it end?

Another thing I take issue with, is this kid gets shot....

But in Kansas City...a white kid is almost burned to death by black racists because the kid's last name is 'Coon'....almost ZERO fucking media attention.

Sauce for that story

Even More Sauce for that Story

Then, Obama......

Oh God don't get me started on that jackass.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/17260926/...ng-brushed-off

Here's a link to the local news story...in case anyone doubts the story.

Pretty insane...

**Malorn** · 2012-04-02, 05:17 AM

Meh.

WildGunsTomcat · 2012-04-02, 09:38 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

People siding with Zimmerman want to see proof and not see an innocent man convicted because some race peddlers make an issue out of it and the media hypes it for ratings. The coverage has been horribly biased. It's embarrassing and shameful.

In America we are innocent until proven guilty, so people siding with Zimmerman are not the same as the people pushing to convict him.

Our media is also covering the story horribly and convicting the man on TV because drama and injustice gets more clicks and ad revenue (Ya newsflash, the Media is a business, so it too is biased by nature).

(popping back in for this comment on how the story is being represented, not the facts of the story)

Exactly.

If Zimmerman is guilty, as I have stated numerous times before...I'll be the first to tell you to put him in jail.

What I take umbrage with is the OBVIOUS media bias and the petty and blatant race baiting being done by many people in this country.

I mean...fuck...Al Sharpton all but TOLD the black community on Friday that if "Justice" isn't served to Zimmerman that they should escalate their activities past civil disobedience. So Sharpton is advocating violence against people without actually coming out and saying it.....and he's not being persecuted why? Because people are fucking stupid that's why...I have no other way to explain that one.

What I also find amusing is the people from other countries using this incident to poke a fucking stick at America once again, although why I'm shocked I have not a clue...this is just par for the course really.

How about we let the investigation complete, and IF there is going to be a trial...and that's a HUGE IF.....let that outcome complete before we try and convict the man.

Figment · 2012-04-02, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

People siding with Zimmerman want to see proof and not see an innocent man convicted because some race peddlers make an issue out of it and the media hypes it for ratings. The coverage has been horribly biased. It's embarrassing and shameful.

In America we are innocent until proven guilty, so people siding with Zimmerman are not the same as the people pushing to convict him.

Our media is also covering the story horribly and convicting the man on TV because drama and injustice gets more clicks and ad revenue (Ya newsflash, the Media is a business, so it too is biased by nature).

(popping back in for this comment on how the story is being represented, not the facts of the story)

Thing is, he is guilty of a killing: he took someone's life, regardless of why. You honestly think that if you kill someone and there are no witnesses you can get away with it because motive can't immediately be established?

Even if it is clear someone didn't just defend themselves, they could say "well hey, I have the right to bare arms, they for no reason felt threatened, they all overreacted and attacked me, so I had to kill them". In the most perverse scenario, a mass murderer or terrorist could claim self-defense under the condition that nobody can tell a story contradicting his or hers.

Zimmerman IS the killer and thus the only and confirmed suspect. He's not yet a convict, however, a court should determine if the killing was justified, not he himself. Otherwise you have no need for a justice system at all.

Media portraying someone either way, guilty or innocent, is irrelevant. It has no impact on the legal side of things or chain of events that lead to the killing. Media certainly are no justifiable reason to convict or defend someone. Only the facts are.

Motive needs to be established in a court of law and detective work, not by the police arriving on the scene. They have to arrest the suspect and bring him to court, not be judge and jury.

Quovatis · 2012-04-02, 10:59 AM

In the new "enhanced" video of Zimmerman being taken to the police station, you can now clearly see there are lacerations on the back of his head. That doesn't mean everything he's said is true, but it does back up some of it.

We just need all the evidence. It's a real shame that the media and especially the black community don't care about all the evidence and have already convicted Zimmerman.