• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is there no inconsistency in Zimmerman's story?

dolphinocean

dolphinocean

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Messages
4,138
Reaction score
807
Location
Volunteer State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Zimmerman may have passed the lie detector test. But, is there really no inconsistency in Zimmerman's reenactment account of the night he shot Martin? Despite his cool and calm demeaner in the reenactment video that came across to us like he is a truthful person, was there really no hint of deception seeping out from those obvious inconsistencies.


Watch this:




I know, supporters of Zimmerman is crying foul right now with, but...but... But, go ahead and spill your guts.
 
Due to the nature of human memory, there are always inconsistencies.
 
Aberration said:
Due to the nature of human memory, there are always inconsistencies.
Click to expand...
So true.

Now then please keep that in mind whenever you feel like taking Zimmerman's words hooks lines and sinkers without fault regarding his statements that Martin confronted him, punched him down to the floor and kept punching him and slamming his head into the concrete and uttered some life threatening threats at him.
 
dolphinocean said:
So true.

Now then please keep that in mind whenever you feel like taking Zimmerman's words hooks lines and sinkers without fault regarding his statements that Martin confronted him, punched him down to the floor and kept punching him and slamming his head into the concrete and uttered some life threatening threats at him.
Click to expand...

and please keep in mind that Z is innocent till proven guilty.
Got to ask, what difference would it make if his head was slammed 12 times or 50 times?
 
mike2810 said:
and please keep in mind that Z is innocent till proven guilty.
Got to ask, what difference would it make if his head was slammed 12 times or 50 times?
Click to expand...

No... Zimmerman is totally guilty. He admits to killing Martin.
 
mike2810 said:
and please keep in mind that Z is innocent till proven guilty.
Got to ask, what difference would it make if his head was slammed 12 times or 50 times?
Click to expand...
This is about focusing on his inconsistencies in which you folks kept saying there is none. Nothing is said about guilt or innocent here. So, stay focus.

If Zimmerman is said to have his head slammed repeatedly so many times, it's hard to believe that not only he didn't have wounds consistent to his head being pounded against a hard and rough surface but also he wasn't even disorientated let alone dizzy or lost of consciousness due to contusion or concussion. Yet, he was the one knowing every lucid detail of what was going on down to Martin sliding his hand across his chest and noticing his jacket was lifted up and be faster in action than Martin in reaching for his gun after being though all the face and head pounding.

I know whatever I said won't convince you a bit, but hey I like to be contrary when I see the needs for it.
 
Another inconsistency, which is not in this part 1 video but in the full reenactment, Zimmerman mentioned that after shooting Martin and getting on top of him, he saw a man with a flash light walking towards him and he asked him for help. The man said he was going to call the police but Zimmerman told him he had already called the police and they were on their way.

Zimmerman then said at that point the police came and he put up his hand and told police his gun was in his holster. At that point the police got his weapon and handcuffed him.

This inconsistency has more to do with the police report than Zimmerman because in the police report there was no mention of another guy with a flash light. We know that somenbody did take a picture of Zimmerman's head at close up to show the bleeding wounds at the back of his head. Was this unknow photopgrapher the same person as the man with the flash light Zimmerman was talking about?

When did this photographer took this picture of Zimmerman's head? Before the police arrive or after the police arrive? If he was there before the police arrive, why wasn't he mentioned in the police report? Why wasn't him also treated as a suspect since the police would not know who was involved?

If after the police arrived, the photographer could not have taken the picture because the police was beginning to conduct an official crime scene investigation and Zimmerman was handcuffed and led to the back of police car.
 
Tettsuo said:
Killing is an offense. The question is whether he should be punished for the offense.
Click to expand...

Killing is a non legal term and as such is not an offense.
 
Thunder said:
the jury MUST assume he is innocent. The public, however...is under no such requirement.
Click to expand...

they prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not innocence.
 
Tettsuo said:
Good, because I'm not charging Zimmerman with anything. I'm simply stating a fact.
Click to expand...

edit to say, this is a waste of time.
 
Last edited:
ARealConservative said:
you stated an opinion (he should be punished)

the next fact you post will be your first in this thread.
Click to expand...
No, I didn't state an opinion. Zimmerman is guilty of killing another person.

guilty adjective, guilt·i·er, guilt·i·est.
1. having committed an offense, crime, violation, or wrong, especially against moral or penal law; justly subject to a certain accusation or penalty; culpable: The jury found her guilty of murder.
2. characterized by, connected with, or involving guilt: guilty intent.
3. having or showing a sense of guilt, whether real or imagined: a guilty conscience.
Click to expand...
 
Tettsuo said:
No... Zimmerman is totally guilty. He admits to killing Martin.
Click to expand...

Playing the word game are we.
It is a fact that Z ending T's life. The question remains was it self defense or other. It is still up to the prosecutor to prove that it was not self defense and it was murder.
So in the eyes of the law, he is innocent of murder until proven guilty.
 
mike2810 said:
Playing the word game are we.
It is a fact that Z ending T's life. The question remains was it self defense or other. It is still up to the prosecutor to prove that it was not self defense and it was murder.
So in the eyes of the law, he is innocent of murder until proven guilty.
Click to expand...
Zimmerman commit an act that is not seen as acceptable in our society. The question is not one of innocence, but if he should be punished for committing it.

Killing someone is bad regardless of the reason. It can be justified in the eyes of the law, but it's still an act we as a society see as 'bad'. You cannot be innocent of an act that in the eyes of our society, it's bad.

I'm trying to keep it as simply as possible so there's no confusion. Words still have meaning and Zimmerman is not innocent in the eyes of our society and thus the law.
 
dolphinocean said:
Zimmerman may have passed the lie detector test. But, is there really no inconsistency in Zimmerman's reenactment account of the night he shot Martin? Despite his cool and calm demeaner in the reenactment video that came across to us like he is a truthful person, was there really no hint of deception seeping out from those obvious inconsistencies.


Watch this:



I know, supporters of Zimmerman is crying foul right now with, but...but... But, go ahead and spill your guts.
Click to expand...


This means nothing...


Whats meaningful is Zim's fear of death/serious bodily harm at, the *PRECISE* moment of Martin's aggravated assault
 
Tettsuo said:
Killing is an offense. The question is whether he should be punished for the offense.
Click to expand...

Killing is not an offense. Where do you get this crap?

Murder is an offense. Do you say a cop who shoots someone justifiably has committed an offense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom