Three problems with George Zimmerman’s self-defense claims

Interesting points

 

You are mistaken, brutha.

You have clearly been deceived by the far Left.

Don't believe anything the far Left says about this case. The far Left and their supporters are so stupid they can't even get George Zimmerman’s street address correct!

 

Interesting opinions. Too bad arrests aren't made based on public opinion.

 

So you don't object to posting a private address on the internet, only if it's a wrong private address on the internet?

Does that mean you support freedom of speech or the abuse of freedom of speech?

It's all confusing to me.

 

Zimmerman forced Martin to commit battery ?
Martin did not have the choice to sit tight and wait for police ?

 

I thought Florida's law did not have the "reasonable" fear standard. If I'm wrong, I'm glad. It makes their SYG law much less likely to become cover for murder.

 

3 reasons the OP is BS

1. witnesses place Martin on top of Zimmerman slamming his head into the concrete sand punching him. Weight does not matter in a fight. If you are sucker punched and not used to fighting any one can take you down. One of the baddest guys I ever knew only weighed 140, he was a expert at street/bar fighting

2. Zimmerman was never told not top follow. The exact words of the 911 dispatcher were " sir you don't need to do that". 911 dispatchers are not law enforcement personnel btw

3. maybe you should try letting someone sit on you and pound your head into a sidewalk and see if you fear for your life

 

Ha-Ha!

You are very correct, Jackdog.

Don't believe anything the far Left says about this case.

The far Left and their supporters are so stupid they can't even get George Zimmerman’s street address correct!

The facts surrounding this case are now clearly established by several eyewitnesses.

Trayvon Martin was clearly the aggressor in this incident.

He attacked George Zimmerman from behind and knocked him to the ground while he was walking back to his vehicle to wait for the police to arrive.

Case Closed, Problem solved.

 

That little rat bag who retweeted the wrong address ought to be charged with incitement. What goes around ALWAYS comes around Spike.

 

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*) post.

 

as I said on another thread on this subject

zimmerman was wrong to play cop. lost ammo.

travon was wrong to play "gangsta". lost life

I have a CCW and 90% of the time I am armed, and I am observant of my surroundings and keep a eye out in my neighborhood. But I don't go looking for issues.

I can pretty much guess what happened here. Zimmerman followed martin. Martin copped a attitude and sucker punched Zimmerman. When martin was on top pounding the crap out of him, Zimmerman shot Martin. Both parties made bad decisions that day. Zimmerman's was in following, Martins was in thinking I want to beat the crap out of this dude

 

Seems to me a grown man picked a fight with a teenager lost the fight and he shot the kid for it.

Thats why i carry.If man stalked me for walking down the street and then confronts me he will get more than a bag of candy coming at him.

 

yeah


little guys can never beat big guys

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1M7q...ef=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugG_5ogxufM

 

Spike Lee tweeted the wrong address....

 

Thats basically it. Even if the kid is a pot smoking bully gangsta wanna be there was no reason he needed to die that day. Zimmerman is not a cop for good reasons. He should be arrested.

 

and unless the man is a direct physical threat you will be in prison where the prisoners will do a little dental work on you and turn you into their boy toy.

best advice I can give any CCW holder is the second you pull that weapon your life just changed forever for the worse and it does not matter whether you are in the right or the wrong

 

Zimmerman could have stayed in car

 

The Hispanic should setup a defense fund. I would donate. When you pull out your gun, its too kill -- that's what he did.

The thug thought he could pound on the hispanic's head and get away with it. He was wrong.

 

and Martin could have kept on walking instead of beating up on the nosey old white dude to show how bad he was

 

20/20 hindsight. The thug shouldn't have been pounding the hispanic's head on the concrete. I'm sure the hispanic wasn't expecting that - in his mind's eye, he was just checking up on suspicious activity. Thank god, the hispanic had a gun or else he could be dead now.

 

Not really.

The article first claims "lack of threat" to Zimmerman, and then begrudgingly identifies a threat: that Zimmerman testified that Martin confronted him, after he had thought he lost Martin, and had started back to his SUV. Regardless the claimed 'problems' with this testimony, the article is obviously badly written, and utterly biased.

The fact is that Martin stood 6 inches taller than Zimmerman. Weight is not nearly as important as stature or physical shape. It also isn't nearly as important as attitude or fighting skill. The article is projecting the author's own hesitation to physically confront someone on Martin, which is an illegitimate tactic. The author is scoffing at the notion of Zimmerman being at a physical disadvantage, when witness testimony - and irrefutable evidence of Zimmerman's injuries - says otherwise.

Point One: Refuted.

Further baring of the author's bias. The 911 operator obviously did not "specifically tell" Zimmerman to not follow Martin. He said "we do not need you to do that". That is a suggestion; it comes from no legal authority, and it is not enforceable.

It is also moot. Regardless whether it was a legally enforceable order or not, it in itself does not prove a contradiction Zimmerman's explanation that he lost Martin, and had started back to his SUV. At that point, any claim of "stalking/pursuing/chasing" or any other misleading provocative BS adverb engaged in by the left is moot. You either believe that Zimmerman had lost him and turned around, or you don't.

But you cannot prove that he is lying about it with this claim. The author attempts to use the fact that Zimmerman stepped out of his SUV - a fact which is not in dispute - to support the notion that Martin was under threat. That is simply not true, if Zimmerman's assertion that he lost Martin and was going BACK to his SUV is true.

There is no difficulty in Zimmerman making the case that he was in danger. He has eyewitness testimony proving that Martin was on top of him, and raining down blows on him. He has irrefutable physical injury. My bet is that Martin's autopsy will show little damage to him other than on his knuckles (from Zimmerman), his bullet wound, and perhaps a random slight scrape. That is my bet - and if it proven to be true, it will further legitimize my rebuttal here.

Point Two: Refuted.

Further evidence of the amateurishness of this article. Zimmerman didn't shoot Zimmerman.

Zimmerman has every right to patrol his subdivision. It additionally sounds like he was doing so with the tacit approval and understanding of the neighborhood. In addition, this isn't even about SYG: this is about standard self-defense during an assault and battery. SYG literally solely refers to the unsupportable claims of those who say that Martin had the right to SYG if Zimmerman initiated a physical confrontation with Martin - which the evidence does not support. All the evidence has provided us so far is that Zimmerman asked what Martin was doing there - and it isn't even crystal clear when he asked THAT.

There was no physical confrontation by Zimmerman that the evidence supports. Testimony by Zimmerman claims that the physical confrontation was intiated by Martin.

To claim that Zimmerman had a significant physical advantage over Martin is absolutely unsupportable. Not only is the author speculating about Zimmerman's weight (I posted a recent pic of Zimmerman that contradicts the orange jumpsuit picture, as it looks like he's significantly slimmer in the face), but he also does not address the significant difference in STATURE between the two people. 6 inches - when physically confronting someone - is serious business, and a major leverage advantage for the taller person.

It would also instill major confidence in the taller person.

Point Three: Refuted.

 

Without a gun, they'd both be alive because he wouldn't have confronted Martin in the first place.

Zimmerman is no poster-child for CCW. He was a cop wanna-be playing out his fantasy as neighborhood-watch captain.

From what we know so far, nothing Martin did deserved death. And nothing he did before the confrontation justified the confrontation.

 

Then you are dangerous. If someone asks you "what are you doing here", you have no right to shoot him.

 

You dont know Zimmerman wouldnt have followed him without a gun.

You dont know no one would have died. I feel it safe to say if you beat someones head into the ground or road enough you can kill someone ~

 

From what we know, Martin DID do something to warrant getting shot. He assaulted a CCW carrier and the law allows you to defend yourself with that weapon. If Martin wasn't a wannabe gangster he'd still be alive as well.