• 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.

Did you all know about this evidence on Martin's phone the judge wouldn't allow?

To be honest, I didn't pay much attention to the Skittles angle. But now that I've read a bit about "blunts" and "lean" and the unaccounted for time between leaving the 7-11 and Zimmerman first noticing him....he could have smoked a "blunt". Or suppose the "blunt" was still in Martin's pocket when Zimmerman first saw him and not knowing if a Zimmerman was a cop, he took off running so he could hide it and then circle back round to confront Zimmerman...or he could have just waited for Zimmerman to catch up.

And it is also highly plausible that Martin bought the Skittles for his brother, Chad...but whose not really his brother. So the question is, what was 14yr old Chad going to do with the Skittles? Make some "lean" and "smoke some blunt" during the NFL game with Trayvon, perhaps? But then lots of people get stoned and have a few drinks during football games. Probably half the country at least. But none of that has anything to directly to do with Martins killing, so I guess thats why I didn't follow the Skittle angle very closely. Instead I focused on the evidence in the immediate moments of the attack to see if it was really self defense...and I concluded way back when that technically it was...but it seemed to have a lot mitigating circumstance to suggest that Zimmerman was culpable because he chased after Martin instead of staying in his vechicle like he was supposed to. He created the situation, he was the aggressor first, he had the advantage over Martin, and he knew that the police were coming. What advantage over Zimmerman did Martin have...he had no idea who or what the creep following him wanted. It is Martin that acted according the SYG law because he stood his ground against a threat with the only weapons he had, his fists. So in the course of standing his ground, Martin is the one who gets shot.

Another liberal who worships violence? If someone is annoying you this justifies violently assaulting the other person. I've seen liberals claim that on the GZ case many times. Glorification of violence.
 
iLOL
:doh
:lamo
You are the one showing that you do not know the evidence, or the applicability of that you do know.
I'm just hypothesizing and speculating based on the evidence like everyone else...including you.


No there wasn't and no you haven't. So you are telling a lie. There is no mitigating circumstances against him at all.
Ew boy, here comes the nyuh uhhh, you don't know, neener neener, you're a liar routine...right on cue. <yawn>


No there wasn't and no you haven't. So you either do not know the evidence or are purposely telling a lie. There was no chase. He followed in his vehicle.
He then got out and followed on foot only to stop doing so. There was no chase.
Following is also what stalkers and serial killers do. Trayvon had no idea who the creep following him was, so he started running and so did Zimmerman. Zimmerman's shortness of breath from running after Trayvon is what tipped the dispatcher off that Zimmerman was following Trayvon..

Zimmerman: <panting>

Dispatcher: Are you following him?

Zimmerman: <panting> Yes.

He wasn't on NW, but on his way to the store.
He was inside the gated community when he first saw Trayvon. He watched him from his SUV and then got out and started following him on foot. Then Trayvon started RUNNING!!!!! Zimmerman said so himself in a recorded call to the dispatcher.

And secondly.
He is not beholden to any NW rules. Nor are they rules. But guidelines.
Nor can those guidelines prevent him from acting the way he did, as his actions were legal.
He broke the rules and started following Trayvon. What was he going to do when he caught up with him?

Wrong!
Trayvon was not standing any ground, but unlawfully attacking.
Trayvon had a right to protect himself, too. The deadly threat facing Trayvon was an armed nutball who was following him for no apparent reason. How was Trayvon supposed to know Zimmerman wasn't some pervert or serial killer? Was he supposed to wait until Zimmerman got close enough to do him harm? Or does he stand his ground and become the aggressor instead of the victim. The SYG law says he doesn't have to wait to become a victim, he can stand and defend himself with deadly force (it used to be called reasonable force) if he feels his life in in eminent danger. You could be dead if you waited for an attacker to make the first move.


Trayvon approached Zimmerman and circled him. That shows he was not trying to get away, but was trying to intimidate him.
How do you know Trayvon circled Zimmerman?

here was no pursuit. Trayvon went South and had more than enough time to get home. While Zimmerman went East and then came back West.
Why did Zimmerman do that? Why didn't he just wait for the police where he was?

When Trayvon approached Zimmerman from his rear when Zimmerman was not a threat of any sorts. Did you get that? From his rear.

Trayvon didn't attack him from behind, instead he asked Zimmerman to his face, "why are you following me?" Zimmerman responded, "why are you here?" Is it possible that Zimmerman was reaching for his gun while he said that and Trayvon saw him and punched him in the nose and tackled him to the ground before Zimmerman could get his gun fully out? Why yes, it is.

He approached yelling his question and immediately stuck Zimmerman upon arrival. That is an attack.
Trayvon's actions are not those of a person in fear.
Trayvon could have been riding on fear since he first saw that he was being followed by Zimmerman. His actions are those of a person defending themselves from a percieved threat ...or a real one such as another person trying to pull a gun on him.
 
Have you authenticated those tweets?

They look like facebook posts, not tweets.

Whether they are fake or fabricated i do not know.

However i find it very peculiar, that not a single evidence from TMs facebook and/or twitter
Account was put into evidence in this trial.

If this is not his real account, what does his Real Account look like?

Something smells fishy.
 
Last edited:
PLEASE EXPLAIN THE LEGAL AUTHORITY OF AND LEGAL DUTY TO COMPLY WITH "NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH" GUIDELINES.

Cite a source, any source. That claim has always been totally false.

WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING????

"...The police department official who worked with George Zimmerman on establishing a neighborhood watch program at a gated community in Sanford, Fla., testified Tuesday that members of such groups were not supposed to follow suspicious people and were told to stand aside and allow the police to do their jobs...."
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/...n-neighborhood-watch-20130625,0,7056736.story

When the police tell you to do something.....it's usually more than just a suggestion. Anyway, Zimmerman didn't seem to have a problem following NW "protocol" the five or six times he called the police before. So what made this time so different?
 
I'm just hypothesizing and speculating based on the evidence like everyone else...including you.
Wrong!
The evidence says one thing, you are saying another. That is not doing the same thing.


Ew boy, here comes the nyuh uhhh, you don't know, neener neener, you're a liar routine...right on cue. <yawn>
Ah... so you already knew you were wrong!

Well, that is a start.


Following is also what stalkers and serial killers do.
Following is what children do.
Following is what adults do.
So ****ing what!
It wasn't illegal.
There was no stalking and there was no serial killing.
You are being absurd.


Trayvon had no idea who the creep following him was, so he started running and so did Zimmerman.
Wrong!
Trayvon took off after circling Zimmerman. Zimmerman said he ran off in a skipping like fashion. That is not running away in fear.
The fact that he came back and circled Zimmerman says he was not scarred.
Learn the damn evidence.


Zimmerman's shortness of breath from running after Trayvon is what tipped the dispatcher off that Zimmerman was following Trayvon..

Zimmerman: <panting>

Dispatcher: Are you following him?

Zimmerman: <panting> Yes.
Wrong again!

That is not a chase, but Zimmerman heading in the same direction he had seen Trayvon go.
That is called following.
And you are hearing what you want to hear. There was no panting.
Nor did Zimmerman run. That is the evidence.
He was going up a slight incline and it was windy.


He was inside the gated community when he first saw Trayvon. He watched him from his SUV and then got out and started following him on foot. Then Trayvon started RUNNING!!!!! Zimmerman said so himself in a recorded call to the dispatcher.
:doh
He said he was with, as he was. He was not on duty that night, but on his way to the store.
Which you do not seem to understand matters not one but.


He broke the rules and started following Trayvon.
And again. They are not rules, but guidelines. Do you really not understand that?
They are not anything that has to be followed. Do you also not understand that?

And because as you were already informed, "Nor can those guidelines prevent him from acting the way he did, as his actions were legal", he is not beholden to them or can they be used against him.
Or in other words; His being part of NW does not matter one ****ing bit.
Not only do you not know the evidence, you don't know how what you do know applies.

Trayvon had a right to protect himself, too. The deadly threat facing Trayvon was an armed nutball who was following him for no apparent reason. How was Trayvon supposed to know Zimmerman wasn't some pervert or serial killer? Was he supposed to wait until Zimmerman got close enough to do him harm? Or does he stand his ground and become the aggressor instead of the victim. The SYG law says he doesn't have to wait to become a victim, he can stand and defend himself with deadly force (it used to be called reasonable force) if he feels his life in in eminent danger. You could be dead if you waited for an attacker to make the first move.
For Pete's sake. :doh
Way to ignore the evidence.
There was no threat form Zimmerman when Trayvon approached him.
Zimmerman was headed away from him.
There was no reason for Trayvon to attack.
None.


How do you know Trayvon circled Zimmerman?
That is the evidence.


Why did Zimmerman do that? Why didn't he just wait for the police where he was?
Zimmerman already stated why. NOr was he required to wait for the Police so you speculating why he didn't means absolutely nothing.


Trayvon didn't attack him from behind,
I say he approached him from his behind and you reply with he did not attack him from behind?
You are obviously not paying attention.
Sad!


instead he asked Zimmerman to his face, "why are you following me?"
That is actually wrong.
You are acting like he casually walked up to Zimmerman and asked ahis question in a civilized manner.
That did not happen.
Watch the walk-through.
Trayvon came at him from his left rear in a hasty manner yelling his question. When he arrived upon Zimmerman immediately struck him. That is an attack.
It didn't matter what Zimmerman's answer was to his question. It was part of his attack.


Is it possible that Zimmerman was reaching for his gun while he said that and Trayvon saw him and punched him in the nose and tackled him to the ground before Zimmerman could get his gun fully out? Why yes, it is.
Why no it isn't, as it is not part of the evidence.

DeeDee, who Trayvon supposedly told everything to, never mentioned him saying he had a gun.
And she never heard him say anything about a gun in the initial confrontation either.
John Good never saw any gun as he watched them.And he never heard him say help me he has a gun. Nothing.
What you suggest is not in accord with the evidence, nor is it likely considering the evidence.


Trayvon could have been riding on fear since he first saw that he was being followed by Zimmerman. His actions are those of a person defending themselves from a percieved threat ...or a real one such as another person trying to pull a gun on him.
Bs!
Those are not the actions of a person in fear.
A person in fear does not circle you to size you up, and then lay in wait to attack you, or return to attack you from a safe location, after waiting for your back to be towards them.

Those are the only two possibilities in accord with the evidence.
That is an attack.

He approached yelling his question and immediately stuck Zimmerman upon arrival. That is an attack.
Trayvon's actions are not those of a person in fear.
 
When the police tell you to do something.....it's usually more than just a suggestion. Anyway, Zimmerman didn't seem to have a problem following NW "protocol" the five or six times he called the police before. So what made this time so different?
Maybe it had something to do with the Call-Taker telling him to let him know if the suspicious person did anything else.
Which is being told.

Which is different from saying; "We don't need you to do that". Which is only a suggestion.


Which really doesn't matter as following he was doing is legal.
 
Setting aside the attempted derailment by Moot to ANYTHING but what was on TM's cell phone and blocked from evidence... TM prior to this explaining he can win a fight by smashing a person's nose - which happened to GZ - and TM explaining the disadvantage of someone on the ground over you in a fight - which is what he did to GZ...

... the judge saying that is "irrelevant" - while allowing anything about such topics about GZ into record, says the judge was kissing the prosecutor's ass, regard of the verdict. The case was SO weak, the judge simply couldn't corrupt it for her fellow elected politician Corey.
 
Is that in evidence somewhere?

It wasn't in that dump with the texts and pictures, as far as I could tell.

Its not in evidence.

We no longer need to talk about the evidence. He is not guilty based on it.

I posted it because two members here challenged me to support my "fire ass lean" joke.
 
That statement there is worth the whole discussion. Kind of a private joke but enjoyable just the same.

What I don't understand is for a year people have been fighting about whether or not Martin was stoned on marijuana. Some argued the THC level was so low that it could have been smoked days before and others thought the level was appropriate for very recent use. No one during that time had been stating as far as I could remember he was high on Skittle Tea. Then as evidence you have a supposed text that reeks of a poor attempt to sound "ghetto".
Did that same text include the names of the Asiana pilots too?

Interesting, considering his texts from the actual cell phone sound exactly alike.
 
They look like facebook posts, not tweets.

Whether they are fake or fabricated i do not know.

However i find it very peculiar, that not a single evidence from TMs facebook and/or twitter
Account was put into evidence in this trial.

If this is not his real account, what does his Real Account look like?

Something smells fishy.

George's texts etc were also NOT allowed at trial.
 
If you reversed that - you'd have the same, true statement.

They were both thugs, both causing trouble, evidently - and no evidence came out during the entire investigation and trial that proved otherwise. The only ball that Zimmerman has is he called 911, but that was before he acted - not after. This is an example of 'when things go really wrong and no one else is around to see it.'

And because one is dead and there were no eyewitnesses - we have Zimmerman's word, a smattering of evidence that amounts to nothing, and mere personal opinions.

Oooops!! Mega fail.

GZ has a broken nose, and head injuries, TM has an abrasion on his knuckle and of course the fatal wound. CLEAR evidence one was a "mugger". "smattering of evidence" LOL Uhm it's the only evidence we have, discount it in your own mind if you need to make your hallucinations real, that's ok, but don't claim your view holds water.
"that amounts to nothing"??? Sayyyyyyyyy what?? Those are the facts of the case. Again, I realize your version requires you deny/ignore/belittle the evidence, same thing the special prosecutor attempted. If that works for you have at it. Level headed, logical folks look at the evidence in an attempt to determine if one person's version can survive rigorous examination. Kinda like what the SPD did TWICE.

Then again, your "mere personal opinions" are MUCH more believable than law based than police investigations.
 
The "if you punch someone in the nose you win the fight" was singularly the most relevant and important FACT (not subjective or speculation) about TM of all. And it was kept out, while allowing evidence about GZ and physical combat allowed in. To me, that made it 100% clear the judge was NOT impartial.

That Corey hide that evidence for months is basis for sanctions both in terms of attorney fees and against her law license.

I think we need a SCOTUS ruling on the admissibility of cell phone records. Her reasoning was that there was no proof he'd sent those texts himself. And that would be true. But, seems to me, it'd be a case of "let the jury decide." I agree with you . . . the punch in the nose text and the text about losing a fight because a kid got on top of him and he couldn't defend himself . . . both very powerful.
 
I think we need a SCOTUS ruling on the admissibility of cell phone records. Her reasoning was that there was no proof he'd sent those texts himself. And that would be true. But, seems to me, it'd be a case of "let the jury decide." I agree with you . . . the punch in the nose text and the text about losing a fight because a kid got on top of him and he couldn't defend himself . . . both very powerful.

Agree. And I'm sure defense could have found an expert to show consistency in language style between all the texts on his phone.


What I'm mostly interested in regarding these texts is WHO deleted them if the phone was in police custody.
 
If you reversed that - you'd have the same, true statement.

They were both thugs, both causing trouble, evidently - and no evidence came out during the entire investigation and trial that proved otherwise. The only ball that Zimmerman has is he called 911, but that was before he acted - not after. This is an example of 'when things go really wrong and no one else is around to see it.'

And because one is dead and there were no eyewitnesses - we have Zimmerman's word, a smattering of evidence that amounts to nothing, and mere personal opinions.

At least 3 eyewitnesses saw TM on top of GZ which is just a small part of case for acquittal.

The "smattering of evidence that amounts to" the jury finding NOT Guilty!
 
I think we need a SCOTUS ruling on the admissibility of cell phone records. Her reasoning was that there was no proof he'd sent those texts himself. And that would be true. But, seems to me, it'd be a case of "let the jury decide." I agree with you . . . the punch in the nose text and the text about losing a fight because a kid got on top of him and he couldn't defend himself . . . both very powerful.

Did you find the "punch in the nose" text?

I just don't remember it from the third supplemental or connors testimony.

If you did, which of the eight was it in?
 
What texts?

The ruling to seal his texts and phone records was made months ago.. along with not allowing any prior bad acts. Evidently .. he was texting and emailing before and after the shooting.. and they were called "incendiary".
 
Two things come to mind. It does not need to go to the supreme court if a court (any court) simply finds that the Zimmerman trial judge and prosecution errored and should have let the text messages end; if they disbar or at least sanction one of the prosecutors responsible then the precedent will be set and no one will seek to block that from happening in the future. As to the argument of "who sent" that should be up to a jury to decide. If a prosecutor wants to claim others had access to TM's phone they can do that with witness testimony and cause doubt upon the messages but that is not for them to determine and keep away from a jury IMO.


I think we need a SCOTUS ruling on the admissibility of cell phone records. Her reasoning was that there was no proof he'd sent those texts himself. And that would be true. But, seems to me, it'd be a case of "let the jury decide." I agree with you . . . the punch in the nose text and the text about losing a fight because a kid got on top of him and he couldn't defend himself . . . both very powerful.
 
Ahh, I see.

The "punch in the nose and win the fight" is based on the account of the afterschool fight.

"Nah, he didn't breed enough. Just a punch in the nose.....then I'm done."

Kinda like O'Mara saying Ms buddies were beating up a homeless guy while he laughed.
 
Did you find the "punch in the nose" text?

I just don't remember it from the third supplemental or connors testimony.

If you did, which of the eight was it in?

You'll have to ask Joko. I got it from him:

The "if you punch someone in the nose you win the fight" was singularly the most relevant and important FACT (not subjective or speculation) about TM of all. And it was kept out, while allowing evidence about GZ and physical combat allowed in. To me, that made it 100% clear the judge was NOT impartial.

That Corey hide that evidence for months is basis for sanctions both in terms of attorney fees and against her law license.
 
Look it up yourself.. I am not going to hunt it up again.

Ok I did look it up. Or at least I tried. You would think in such a high profile case this kind of thing would be all over the internet.
Nuttin.
So I'm saying they don't exist until you can prove otherwise.
 
You'll have to ask Joko. I got it from him:

Really bad paraphrase, actually.

From a quick scan of media articles they're talking about a line from the exchange about the fight after school.

"Nah he didn't breed enough. Just a punch in the nose...then I'm done." Or pretty close.

The texts are here:

Trayvon Text Messages – George Zimmerman Defense Discovery 3rd Supplemental | The Last Refuge

Looks like O'Mara pulled the same stunt as the "video of Martins friends beating up a homeless guy while he laughed" bit.
 
Look it up yourself.. I am not going to hunt it up again.
How can you do something again when you haven't done so in the first place?
 
Back
Top Bottom