• 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.

The Paperwork has been FILED: George Zimmerman Civil Suit

hawke812 said:
It tells me that Zimmerman could have rode on a snail to get an address and made it back to his vehicle in that time, but instead he was at the T. For someone "looking for an address", why did Zimmerman pass the address at Twin Trees and walk ALL the way to Retreat View Cir for an address he never obtained and confront Trayvon Martin instead of returning to his vehicle?
Click to expand...
When are you going to understand that it wouldn't matter one iota if Zimmerman was taking his time trying to see where Trayvon went while getting the address.

It just wouldn't matter.
Doing so isn't illegal.
Doing so isn't provocative.
Doing so isn't instigating.
Doing so isn't starting a confrontation.
Doing so is prudent.

Trayvon had no reason not to have made it to the place he was staying.
Trayvon laying in wait and then attacking is what was provocative, instigating, confrontational, illegal and imprudent.
 
hawke812 said:
Back to the basics...

Do you know what an "affirmative defense" means?
Click to expand...

Your incompetence to address, the "evidence issue" shows, you are not up to par in debating *known evidence*...

1 There's NO evidence that M was physically attacked by Z and there is no evidence Z used force against M

You simply don't have what it takes to keep comments on the topic of the evidence and witnesses
 
Excon said:
When are you going to understand that it wouldn't matter one iota if Zimmerman was taking his time trying to see where Trayvon went while getting the address.

It just wouldn't matter.
Doing so isn't illegal.
Doing so isn't provocative.
Doing so isn't instigating.
Doing so isn't starting a confrontation.
Doing so is prudent.

Trayvon had no reason not to have made it to the place he was staying.
Trayvon laying in wait and then attacking is what was provocative, instigating, confrontational, illegal and imprudent.
Click to expand...

When are you going to understand that it wouldn't matter one iota if Trayvon was taking his time trying to see who was following him and asking him why?

It just wouldn't matter.
Doing so isn't illegal.
Doing so isn't provocative.
Doing so isn't instigating.
Doing so isn't starting a confrontation.
Doing so is prudent.

Zimmerman had no reason not to have made it to his vehicle.
Zimmerman following Trayvon and confronting him by saying "what are you doing around here" and not even attempting to diffuse the situation by telling him he is with NW and actually escalate it by making a motion for his "pocket" near his weapon is what was provocative, instigating, confrontational, illegal and imprudent.
 
JackFrost said:
When are you going to understand that it wouldn't matter one iota if Trayvon was taking his time trying to see who was following him and asking him why?

It just wouldn't matter.
Doing so isn't illegal.
Doing so isn't provocative.
Doing so isn't instigating.
Doing so isn't starting a confrontation.
Doing so is prudent.

Zimmerman had no reason not to have made it to his vehicle.
Zimmerman following Trayvon and confronting him by saying "what are you doing around here" and not even attempting to diffuse the situation by telling him he is with NW and actually escalate it by making a motion for his "pocket" near his weapon is what was provocative, instigating, confrontational, illegal and imprudent.
Click to expand...

1 M most definitely confronted Z. Even M's friend *Dee Dee* and Z are on record saying M initiated the verbal confrontation

2 M did commit an act of unlawful force against Z, by brutally attacking Z without adequate provocation

3 Z's injuries plus witnesses’ statements the night of he shooting support Z’s version of events

4 Z was NOT on watch duty that NIGHT and Z committed NO crime getting out of his car to see where M had run off to
 
Last edited:
ric27 said:
1 M most definitely confronted Z. Even M's friend *Dee Dee* and Z are on record saying M initiated the verbal confrontation
Click to expand...

Yes, happens with copy & paste:lol:

Illegal? Either version will do. "Why are you following me for?" or "Yo, you got a problem homie?" Care to truthfully answer this, or ignore it?

ric27 said:
2 M did commit an act of unlawful force against Z, by brutally attacking Z without adequate provocation
Click to expand...

So says the killer. He going to need more than his followers parroting his claim in court tho:lol:

ric27 said:
3 Z's injuries plus witnesses’ statements the night of he shooting support Z’s version of events
Click to expand...

No they do not. Witness statements do not support his version. No one saw the MMA style beat-down he described. Papercuts on the back of his head do not show his head was repeatedly slammed into concrete.

ric27 said:
4 Z was NOT on watch duty that NIGHT and Z committed NO crime getting out of his car to see where M had run off to
Click to expand...

Irrelevant.

Here is a list of people who were not on watch duty and were committing no crime by doing mundane everyday things like getting out of a vehicle, playing cards, talking etc and were still found guilty of a crime in Florida (manslaughter/m2) to show your point is moot:

Rachel Wade
Yajaira Jimenez-Castillo
Terry Tyrone Davis Jr.
James Brandon Combee
Willard "Joey" McCullen Jr.
John T. Dorsey
Rashad Stewart Martinez
Leon T. Cooper
Howard Strickland
Brandon Ward
James Menard
Justin Campos
David Trombley
Reginald Etienne
Brian Boardway
James Behanna
Laurie Lynn Bartlett
Cindy Gilliland
Tamra Leasure
Sterlin F. Misener
Donald Rivera
Michael McAdams
Donald Stanley Verne
Riley Finway Bryan
Trevor Dooley
Richard Fortner
John Croft
 
JackFrost said:
Yes, happens with copy & paste:lol:

Illegal? Either version will do. "Why are you following me for?" or "Yo, you got a problem homie?" Care to truthfully answer this, or ignore it?



So says the killer. He going to need more than his followers parroting his claim in court tho:lol:



No they do not. Witness statements do not support his version. No one saw the MMA style beat-down he described. Papercuts on the back of his head do not show his head was repeatedly slammed into concrete.



Irrelevant.

Here is a list of people who were not on watch duty and were committing no crime by doing mundane everyday things like getting out of a vehicle, playing cards, talking etc and were still found guilty of a crime in Florida (manslaughter/m2) to show your point is moot:

Rachel Wade
Yajaira Jimenez-Castillo
Terry Tyrone Davis Jr.
James Brandon Combee
Willard "Joey" McCullen Jr.
John T. Dorsey
Rashad Stewart Martinez
Leon T. Cooper
Howard Strickland
Brandon Ward
James Menard
Justin Campos
David Trombley
Reginald Etienne
Brian Boardway
James Behanna
Laurie Lynn Bartlett
Cindy Gilliland
Tamra Leasure
Sterlin F. Misener
Donald Rivera
Michael McAdams
Donald Stanley Verne
Riley Finway Bryan
Trevor Dooley
Richard Fortner
John Croft
Click to expand...

smileys at the end, the same sentence structure....same poster with 2 accounts
 
Excon said:
:doh

Wrong!
He stated what he saw.

Tonight, I was on my way to the grocery store when I saw a male approximately 5'11" to 6'2" casually walking in the rain looking into homes.
George Zimmerman?s Written Statement - Document - NYTimes.com​


"Into homes".
That is the evidence.



First of all, "seemed to" is your take on it. Just as all the rest is your take on it.

Secondly, do you honestly think a person is able to remember traumatic events exactly as they happened each time they retell it?
No, of course not.

And yet all of his variations are consistent.

And he did not put the shooting 20 feet from the body.
That is one heck of an absurd claim.


Of course you can't.
You have had a biased opinion from the get.
It causes you not to consider reality.
Click to expand...

What miracle number is this?

Magical.eyeballs that can make the distinction between looking AT a house and IN a house.

In the dark.

From a distance.

Mix that with a preternatural ability to judge, simply from the way someone is running, whether they are afraid or not.
 
Misinformation... So easy to counter.

JackFrost said:
So says the killer. He going to need more than his followers parroting his claim in court tho:lol:
Click to expand...

The injuries to Z, and the lack of injuries to Martin speak volumes about who physically attacked who.


No they do not. Witness statements do not support his version. No one saw the MMA style beat-down he described. Papercuts on the back of his head do not show his head was repeatedly slammed into concrete.
Click to expand...

1. Yes they do.
2. Zimmerman didn't describe it as a "MMA style beat-down", a witness did.
3. Dishonestly attempting to downplay his injuries by calling them "paper cuts" shows how weak your beliefs truly are.
 
What if...? said:
What miracle number is this?

Magical.eyeballs that can make the distinction between looking AT a house and IN a house.
Click to expand...

If you see someone looking at a house in the rain/dark, I think it would be assumed he was looking in the house in those circumstances. People typically do not walk slowly in the rain, in the dark in an area that has seen a lot of crime admiring architecture. I'll agree, Zimm couldn't be certain which was occuring. But hopefulyl you agree that most would assume the looking "in" the house is the most likely explanation given all of the cirumstances.
 
buck said:
If you see someone looking at a house in the rain/dark, I think it would be assumed he was looking in the house in those circumstances. People typically do not walk slowly in the rain, in the dark in an area that has seen a lot of crime admiring architecture. I'll agree, Zimm couldn't be certain which was occuring. But hopefulyl you agree that most would assume the looking "in" the house is the most likely explanation given all of the cirumstances.
Click to expand...

Sorry man.

The whole "eyes front, nearly running" as the "only" unsuspiscious way to perambulate in the dark on a rainy night just doesn't wash.

The "looking into houses" bit and the "not running in fear" one too I just don't believe

Lily guilding to make M seem more dangerous, IMO.

Looking "into" a house requires physical proximity. Up near the windows looking in.

Turning your head towards a house as you walk by is looking "at" a house.
 
I think Z started gilding the lily of his story right from his first call to NEN. I don't know why, maybe he doesn't know how to do anything else.
 
Grim17 said:
Misinformation... So easy to counter.
Click to expand...

Yes, your misinformation is easy to counter. What is your point?

Grim17 said:
The injuries to Z, and the lack of injuries to Martin speak volumes about who physically attacked who.
Click to expand...

Yes, it shows Trayvon had to fight for his life, but lost.


Grim17 said:
1. Yes they do.
Click to expand...

No they do not. He could have sustained those while struggling on the ground, not by having his head "bashed" into concrete as he falsely claims.


Grim17 said:
2. Zimmerman didn't describe it as a "MMA style beat-down", a witness did.
Click to expand...

Zimmerman stated Martin mounted him and rained blow upon blow down on him, correct? What is that? Karate? Judo? A Chuck Norris roundhouse kick to the temple? Sword-fighting? No, it is MMA style fighting.

Grim17 said:
3. Dishonestly attempting to downplay his injuries by calling them "paper cuts" shows how weak your beliefs truly are.
Click to expand...

Paper-cuts are a weak excuse.
 
What if...? said:
Sorry man.

The whole "eyes front, nearly running" as the "only" unsuspiscious way to perambulate in the dark on a rainy night just doesn't wash.

The "looking into houses" bit and the "not running in fear" one too I just don't believe

Lily guilding to make M seem more dangerous, IMO.

Looking "into" a house requires physical proximity. Up near the windows looking in.
Click to expand...

Well, as Z mentioned that in the 911 call, well before the encounter, I would find that very believable. However, luckily for you, and while I assume you will just dismiss it, Z did indicate T was near the houses - so that offers the physical proximity you were concerned about.
 
spanky said:
I think Z started gilding the lily of his story right from his first call to NEN. I don't know why, maybe he doesn't know how to do anything else.
Click to expand...

No one woud know why, which is why it is unlikely. After the incident he might start gilding. Before, not so much except to people looking for an excuse or specific outcome.
 
buck said:
No one woud know why, which is why it is unlikely. After the incident he might start gilding. Before, not so much except to people looking for an excuse or specific outcome.
Click to expand...

I said I didn't know why, but I certainly can offered an educated guess.

Z gilded his NEN call because he was intent on getting the cops to come out. Saying "there's a black guy walking in the rain" wasn't going to do it.

He gilded his "looking for an address" story because he knew it wasn't going to look good if he was pursuing TM when he shot him.

He ungilded his statements about what happened once he got to the T because a whole lot more happened at the T and down the sidewalk and none of it looks good for Z.
 
buck said:
Well, as Z mentioned that in the 911 call, well before the encounter, I would find that very believable. However, luckily for you, and while I assume you will just dismiss it, Z did indicate T was near the houses - so that offers the physical proximity you were concerned about.
Click to expand...

Again, he only said "looking about" on the call.

And there are no sidewalks in the area in question.

Only lawns and the street.

He only came up with the "looking in houses" thing later.
 
spanky said:
I think Z started gilding the lily of his story right from his first call to NEN. I don't know why, maybe he doesn't know how to do anything else.
Click to expand...

I've gotten the feeling that SPD was kind of "It's Zimmerman again. Whats he on about this time?"

So maybe he felt he needed to "pad" Ms actions so SPD would take him seriously.
 
What if...? said:
Again, he only said "looking about" on the call.

And there are no sidewalks in the area in question.

Only lawns and the street.

He only came up with the "looking in houses" thing later.
Click to expand...

Which is why it was indicated T was cutting between the houses.
 
spanky said:
I said I didn't know why, but I certainly can offered an educated guess.

Z gilded his NEN call because he was intent on getting the cops to come out. Saying "there's a black guy walking in the rain" wasn't going to do it.
Click to expand...

The cops would have come out either way and would have been negligent if they did not.
 
What if...? said:
I've gotten the feeling that SPD was kind of "It's Zimmerman again. Whats he on about this time?"

So maybe he felt he needed to "pad" Ms actions so SPD would take him seriously.
Click to expand...

I don't recall the exact numbers, and do not want to go searching for it again (but did post the numbers here quite some time ago)... I believe that small, gated community (260 units many unoccupied) had been over 500 or so 911/nen calls over the prior year. Z was responsible for a rather small portion of them and he was NW - which would have more then the average individual... So, I've got the feeling you are most likely making assumptions not supported by the facts.
 
Last edited:
buck said:
I don't recall the exact numbers, and do not want to go searching for it again (but did post the numbers here quite some time ago)... I believe that small, gated community had nearly 900 or so 911/nen calls over the prior year. Z was responsible for a rather small portion of them and he was NW - which would have more then the average individual... So, I've got the feeling you are most likely making assumptions not supported by the facts.
Click to expand...

Pretty small community, only takes a few silly calls to get a "rep" for silly calls.

And maybe response is mediocre and it takes something bigger than a stranger walking in your complex to get them to hurry out.

Z was clearly concerned that "these assholes always get away".
 
What if...? said:
Pretty small community, only takes a few silly calls to get a "rep" for silly calls.

And maybe response is mediocre and it takes something bigger than a stranger walking in your complex to get them to hurry out.

Z was clearly concerned that "these assholes always get away".
Click to expand...

Here, I went searching, even though I said I wouldn't:

The answer may lie in police records, which show that 50 suspicious-person reports were called in to police in the past year at Twin Lakes. There were eight burglaries, nine thefts and one other shooting in the year prior to Trayvon’s death.

In all, police had been called to the 260-unit complex 402 times from Jan. 1, 2011 to Feb. 26, 2012
Click to expand...

Shooter of Trayvon Martin a habitual caller to the cops | Crime | Bradenton Herald

Over that same period, Z called NEN 11 times. 11 calls out of 402 calls is hardly a blip in a 260 unit (many unoccupied) comlex. Sorry. You are making assumptions not supported by reality (forget just facts).
 
buck said:
Here, I went searching, even though I said I wouldn't:



Shooter of Trayvon Martin a habitual caller to the cops | Crime | Bradenton Herald

Over that same period, Z called NEN 11 times. 11 calls out of 402 calls is hardly a blip in a 260 unit (many unoccupied) comlex. Sorry. You are making assumptions not supported by reality (forget just facts).
Click to expand...

Z was clearly concerned that "these assholes always get away".
Click to expand...

No, Z was CLEARLY concerned they would get away. Sorry to break this to you, but he was overzealous.

Guilty of Murder 2.

Good news is you can still write to him in the slammer.
 
MaggieD said:
I hate to admit it, but I feel sorry for the guy. I don't think he's a murderer. Whatever happened, I don't think he just decided to shoot TM. I think he got overwhelmed and genuinely feared for his life. There's nothing in his background to indicate he was a violent person or a bully, in my opinion.

I hope he gets a fair trial. Can the state prove who yelled help? And if they can, is that really relevant? I'm not sure it is. No one saw it. Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt...hard to imagine that would happen.

But whichever way it goes, the guy's life is ruined.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I feel bad for him too, but I imagine Trayvon's family feels much much worse, so I give them they greater portion of my sympathy. Zimmerman made a lot of bad decisions that night, and it's a lot for him to live with the rest of his life no mater what the jury decides. And whatever the jury decides, it's not going to fix all the pain or fill the hole the Martin family has been living with since Trayvon's death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom