• 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 Facts of the Case Against George Zimmerman [W:716]

Status
Not open for further replies.

whysoserious

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Messages
8,170
Reaction score
3,199
Location
Charlotte, NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The Facts of the Case Against George Zimmerman

I've noticed a rather large number of people who seem to defend George Zimmerman tooth and nail. What I find disturbing about this is that they insist Zimmerman deserves a fair trial, and he does, but then disregard that Trayvon Martin does not get a trial to defend himself. He's ****ing dead. None of you mind throwing him under a bus to make your case, and you're assholes for doing that. So instead of being douches and just making **** up, let's look at the facts of the case:

1) Trayvon Martin was watching the NBA All-Star game at his father's girlfriend's house (that was his first mistake, the NBA All-Star game is a joke). He apparently got thirsty and/or hungry, so he decided to walk to the neighborhood 7-Eleven. The store was over a mile away and he left at 6:40.

2) Around thirty minutes later, at 7:09, Zimmerman calls 911 to report a "suspicious looking male". Before we go any further, let's examine the maps:

Interactive Timeline Map
Shooting.jpg
As you can see, the Main Entrance is right on the way from the 7-Eleven to the house he was staying at.
In his 911 call (which you can listen to at the Miami Herald Interactive Map Link), you hear Zimmerman say Trayvon is by the Clubhouse at 7:10 - which makes sense. He says that his hands are at his waistband - perhaps his nuts were itchy since we all know Trayvon was not armed.

So, to recap, Trayvon walked to the store and began walking back on the normal route you would expect in a reasonable amount of time. As far as I am aware, there is no evidence that Martin was hanging around or loitering, as the entire incident only occurred 30 minutes after leaving his house and his destination required about 2 miles of walking. He would, of course, walk right by Zimmerman's car. Now, back to the story:

3) At 7:09, Zimmerman called 9/11 to report Martin's presence. After about 2 minutes of being on the phone, at 7:11, Zimmerman says, "Oh **** he's running". I am not aware of that being a crime, but it did occur. You can then hear Zimmerman exit his car. Zimmerman admits that he is chasing Trayvon and is told not to follow any longer.

4) According to the T-Mobile phone record and Trayvon's girlfriend, she called him back at 7:12, 1 minute after he ran away from Zimmerman. At this time, Zimmerman is also talking to the police and giving directions. From the second photo, you can see that at the time of the call, he was parked by the mailboxes. At 7:14, the dispatcher asks Zimmerman to meet the police at the mailboxes, but Zimmerman refuses and asks that the cops call when they arrive so he can tell them where he is. The call ends here.

Map of Shooting
trayvon-map-1.jpg
In this photo, you can see where Zimmerman's truck was, where the mailboxes Zimmerman was asked to go to are, and where the shooting took place.

5) Clearly Zimmerman decided not to heed the dispatchers warnings and continued to chase. The last contact with police was at 7:14. At 7:16, Trayvon's call with his girlfriend drops. She claims she heard the confrontation begin as Trayvon asked why Zimmerman was following him, and Zimmerman asked Trayvon what he was doing there. This is consistent with the timeline was one minute later, at 7:17, this emergency call came into 911:
[video=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Lr3DOqaSE]911 Call with Gunshot[/video]
You can hear someone screaming for help and you can also hear the gunshot. This call has been analyzed and it was determined that it was not Zimmerman who was screaming, though I am sure that is still up for debate.

6) There was clearly an altercation, as the photos show Zimmerman had cuts on his head and it is also reported that he had a broken nose. Zimmerman claims Trayvon started the fight, and Trayvon says... oh wait he can't say anything because he's dead.
Those are all of the facts with no guesses, no shady witness testimony (that's almost always wrong because witness testimony is almost never reliable), and no opinion.


My Conclusion

Who started the fight? We'll never know. We do know this, George Zimmerman followed Trayvon towards his house even after being told by a police dispatcher to stay in his vehicle (actually the dispatcher told him to go the opposite direction the mailboxes). Instead, Zimmerman walked towards Trayvon's house and a confrontation occurred.

George Zimmerman should be tried by a jury of his peers, and I believe he should go to jail. He acted as a vigilante, disregarded orders from police, and ended up shooting an unarmed teenager through the heart - a teenager who was legitamately walking from his house to a 7-Eleven and back. Typically, self-defense cases shift the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defendent, however, with the Stand Your Ground Act, much of that burden is shifted back to the prosecution. Either way, this is an unfortunate situation that resulted in a death and it could have easily been avoided. I hope some of you assholes quit with your negative attacks on the young man, as he is dead and I'd say that's punishment enough - even if he did attack Zimmerman (which you have no proof of other than Zimmerman's word). So, please, shut the **** up and let this trial go its course.
 
thread-crap-wont_die.jpg


And by "thread" I mean this topic.
 
George Zimmerman followed Trayvon towards his house even after being told by a police dispatcher to stay in his vehicle (actually the dispatcher told him to go the opposite direction the mailboxes). Instead, Zimmerman walked towards Trayvon's house and a confrontation occurred.
You are basing your conclusion on lies. For instance, the bolded part. The fact of the matter is that the police dispatcher did not ever tell Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle.

So you are a liar. Plain and simple. And you are basing your opinion on demonstrable lies.
 
Last edited:
thread-crap-wont_die.jpg


And by "thread" I mean this topic.

I'm sorry, you are mad that there are a lot of threads on a political board about a widely discussed political topic?

That sounds like your ****ing problem, pal. :)


You are basing your conclusion on lies. For instance, the bolded part. The fact of the matter is that the police dispatcher did not ever tell Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle.

So you are a liar. Plain and simple. And you are basing your opinion on demonstrable lies.

I'm sorry, you are correct. They told him not to chase. One could use logic to infer that means to get back in his car, especially since he was supposed to meet the police at the mailboxes, but it was not said directly. I can't edit the post, but if I could, I would edit it just for you, Muhammed. That's how much I like you.
 
I'm sorry, you are correct. They told him not to chase. One could use logic to infer that means to get back in his car, especially since he was supposed to meet the police at the mailboxes, but it was not said directly. I can't edit the post, but if I could, I would edit it just for you, Muhammed. That's how much I like you.
That is another lie.
 
Zimmerman 911 Call Transcript – Trayvon Martin | Phoebe's Detention Room


We are going to have a long game of you bitching about semantics here, aren't we? You should learn the definition of the word "lie", or maybe you know the definition and are just lying to pretend that you don't! Aha.
Maybe you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

"we don't need you to do that"

...is not the same as...

"don't do that".

Are you intelligent enough to understand difference between those statements? Or not?
 
At some point people are going to fess up and basically say they're okay with murdering black teens.

Or can people in the government tell that they've actually been saying that the entire time...
 
Maybe you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

"we don't need you to do that"

...is not the same as...

"don't do that".

Are you intelligent enough to understand difference between those statements? Or not?

LOL. So you are claiming he was not told to quit his pursuit? The dispatcher wasn't asking him to stop. Ohhhh clearly, he was just politely letting Zimmerman know that it wasn't necessary, as Zimmerman is not Batman as far as we are aware.

*Edit: I have to admit, I forgot how crazy people are when they debate.

Or what would you say the dispatcher was trying to convey? English is clearly not a first language for you if you do not understand what, "We don't need you to do that" means.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

"we don't need you to do that"

...is not the same as...

"don't do that".

Are you intelligent enough to understand difference between those statements? Or not?

Are you intelligent enough to realise you essentially endorse trayvons murder by this statement?
Are you aware enough you sound like you deserve a padded room?
 
LOL. So you are claiming he was not told to quit his pursuit? The dispatcher wasn't asking him to stop. Ohhhh clearly, he was just politely letting Zimmerman know that it wasn't necessary, as Zimmerman is not Batman as far as we are aware.

*Edit: I have to admit, I forgot how crazy people are when they debate.

Or what would you say the dispatcher was trying to convey? English is clearly not a first language for you if you do not understand what, "We don't need you to do that" means.

Oh, I don't know... what does meaning things mean?
Does meaning things mean things to Zimmer when he's in a psychosis for over a week, shoots a kid, and has half America squealing like he had the right...
 
Maybe you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

"we don't need you to do that"

...is not the same as...

"don't do that".

Are you intelligent enough to understand difference between those statements? Or not?

LoL you got some zimmer in you...
 
Maybe you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

"we don't need you to do that"

...is not the same as...

"don't do that".

Are you intelligent enough to understand difference between those statements? Or not?

It's close enough.
 
Are you intelligent enough to understand difference between those statements? Or not?
I am freely willing to admit that I am not that bright. I graduated with a 2.0 from a public school in the state with the 49th worst record [at teh time] in re education. And that was only because I was able to re-take some classes in summer school where they gave me some inflated grades.

So, please, explain it to me.

Given that the PD's words do not carry the force of law, what is the functional difference between the PD letting Z know that Z's actions were unnecessary and the PD dispatcher telling Z not to perform the actions?
If the PD HAD used the phrase, "Don't do that," how exactly would things be different?
 
Last edited:
LOL. So you are claiming he was not told to quit his pursuit? The dispatcher wasn't asking him to stop. Ohhhh clearly, he was just politely letting Zimmerman know that it wasn't necessary, as Zimmerman is not Batman as far as we are aware.

*Edit: I have to admit, I forgot how crazy people are when they debate.

Or what would you say the dispatcher was trying to convey? English is clearly not a first language for you if you do not understand what, "We don't need you to do that" means.

What some are refusing to admit is 911 saying, "we don't need you to do that," is 911's way of saying don't do that. 911 has neither the authority nor the liability to give direct orders; so they give advice, not orders.

How will this be interpreted in the case? That remains to be seen. I believe however, when taken in context with his Neighborhood Watch training to the same effect, it will not bode well for Zimmerman.
 
Last edited:
Mullah Agrees with Sheik!

Regardless of how all of us feel about this, just know that we have a pretty good system of justice and more often that not it does actually work! This case is a high profile enough that it can't be swept under the rug.

Let the justice run its course.

Diving Mullah
 
First I love your maps, second I disagree with most of your 'conclusions'. The primary purpose of a neighborhood watch, and using police support for the actual 'confrontation' requires that the watchman know the location of and help the police to identify the 'suspect'. That, from your map was not possible, except on foot, once Martin ran down the sidewalk behind the buildings, as he was no longer visible from the roadway. Assuming that your places are correct for Zimmerman and Martin, that gives Martin over 5 minutes to 'run' 75 yards, hardly a rough job for a highschool football player. It is apparent that Martin did not continue heading for 'home' but, as Zimmerman asserts, waited and/or backtracked to 'confront' Zimmerman. Even you stated (based on Martin's girlfriend's account) that Martin, not Zimmerman, spoke first. Zimmerman, via statements reported on his behalf by his father, claims that Martin asked Zimmerman if he "had a problem" and when Zimmerman said no, Martin added "well you do now!". As you say, only one participant's version may make it into the court's official records, but you don't bring skittles and an attitude to a gunfight twice.
 
First I love your maps, second I disagree with most of your 'conclusions'. The primary purpose of a neighborhood watch, and using police support for the actual 'confrontation' requires that the watchman know the location of and help the police to identify the 'suspect'. That, from your map was not possible, except on foot, once Martin ran down the sidewalk behind the buildings, as he was no longer visible from the roadway. Assuming that your places are correct for Zimmerman and Martin, that gives Martin over 5 minutes to 'run' 75 yards, hardly a rough job for a highschool football player. It is apparent that Martin did not continue heading for 'home' but, as Zimmerman asserts, waited and/or backtracked to 'confront' Zimmerman. Even you stated (based on Martin's girlfriend's account) that Martin, not Zimmerman, spoke first. Zimmerman, via statements reported on his behalf by his father, claims that Martin asked Zimmerman if he "had a problem" and when Zimmerman said no, Martin added "well you do now!". As you say, only one participant's version may make it into the court's official records, but you don't bring skittles and an attitude to a gunfight twice.

You're using statements of the defendant to defend the defendant? Also, Martin had no requirement to run home. He lived there. He could walk around all he wanted. Walking in your own neighborhood is hardly a justification for being shot.
 
First I love your maps, second I disagree with most of your 'conclusions'. The primary purpose of a neighborhood watch, and using police support for the actual 'confrontation' requires that the watchman know the location of and help the police to identify the 'suspect'. That, from your map was not possible, except on foot, once Martin ran down the sidewalk behind the buildings, as he was no longer visible from the roadway.
They should have told that to the person at the PD who was on the line w/ Zimmerman.
That guy was under the impression that they did not need Zimmerman to do that.
Iirc, he even went so far to tell Zimmerman that the PD didn't need Z to do that.

Assuming that your places are correct for Zimmerman and Martin, that gives Martin over 5 minutes to 'run' 75 yards, hardly a rough job for a highschool football player.
The time frame may not be that long depending on when you're starting it from. It wasn't that long from when Z said that M was running.
But, yes, there was still plenty of time for M to cover the distance to his house.
Since we don't have his side of the story, we can only speculate as to why he did not go straight there.
I have seen some plausible guesses, but no matter how plausible, they don't mean all that much other than there could have been a good reason. But could have been a good reason doesn't have the same bearing as w/e M's actual reason was. Un fortunately we don't know what that reason was. So, we're left with not much at all in this regard imho.

It is apparent that Martin did not continue heading for 'home' but, as Zimmerman asserts, waited and/or backtracked to 'confront' Zimmerman.
Does Zimmerman assert this? I have seen people on the it4rwebz assert this, but I hadn't noticed it in anything from Zimmerman himself.

Even you stated (based on Martin's girlfriend's account) that Martin, not Zimmerman, spoke first. Zimmerman, via statements reported on his behalf by his father, claims that Martin asked Zimmerman if he "had a problem" and when Zimmerman said no, Martin added "well you do now!". As you say, only one participant's version may make it into the court's official records, but you don't bring skittles and an attitude to a gunfight twice.
Iirc, RZ also said that M said, "You got me," before he keeled over. Presumably M then went, "Ahh," and then his body went slack and the camera pulled back from the close-up.
 
You're using statements of the defendant to defend the defendant? Also, Martin had no requirement to run home. He lived there. He could walk around all he wanted. Walking in your own neighborhood is hardly a justification for being shot.

Martin was not shot for 'walking around', he was shot during the alleged commision of a violent assault.
 
What some are refusing to admit is 911 saying, "we don't need you to do that," is 911's way of saying don't do that. 911 has neither the authority nor the liability to give direct orders; so they give advice, not orders.

How will this be interpreted in the case? That remains to be seen. I believe however, when taken in context with his Neighborhood Watch training to the same effect, it will not bode well for Zimmerman.

As I sat at the table eating my dinner, the server noticed that I had eaten all of the peas from my plate. The server politely asked if I would like some more peas, and I replied "no, thank you, you don't need to do that". The server then began placing more peas onto my plate, so I smacked the spoon from the server's hand and asked "what part of NO, did you not understand?".
 
Last edited:
Because the victim has testified to it.

You mean the defendant in a Murder II trial? I think you're confused. You wouldn't consider the dead guy to be the victim, but the guy with a broken nose is? LOL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom