Trayvon Martin vs. George Zimmerman ....

I wonder why the media chooses to use the much older outdated photo of Trayvon over more current ones?

 

Well. , after seeing those pics, I believe Trayvon IS guilty! Good work, T!

BTW, not that it has ANY relevance at all, but that last picture isn't Trayvon ... or at least that's what I had heard. ....

 

Trayvon guilty of what? No one has accused him of anything, I just don't approve of the media perpetuating one mans guilt by using innocent looking out dated pictures of the other guy.

But then again, I keep forgetting we have already determined his guilt so what does that matter.

 

I think everyone on here has already agreed the media's initial coverage of this is total BS ..... no argument there ...

 

and

Gary,
Don't forget that Zimmerman was treated at the scene by paramedics, then taken to the police station once the decided he was okay for transport there vs. the hospital. I've seen many a broken nose, and I've only a couple times ever seen a bandage on one, and as was said earlier in the thread, often times it's hours before you start to see the bruising/swelling really show up. As for the cut on the back of the head, we don't really have any GOOD footage that shows ANYTHING, and there is a powder that is available to stop bleeding almost instantly, then you clean the area up, put a little triple ointment on it, and it's almost unnoticeable, especially with the poor footage that we've all seen.

I was in a "Fight for my life" one time with a guy a lot bigger than me, and beat the pizz out of him, and didn't look like I'd been in much of a scrape, but it indeed was a guy who until the police lifted me off of him was bigger than I was, and was still a threat to me, so I was still pounding on his face..... He assaulted me, I defended myself, and a man has the right to defend himself with force up to lethal force if he feels his life/safety is still in danger. It's called the "Right to self-preservation (different from getting all liquored up because Alcohol is considered a preservative)," and was my successful defense against a charge lain on me for that above actions.

In Zimmerman's case, he's a well respected citizen and neighbor, known to many as the "Captain" of the neighborhood crime watch, sees someone lurking around at night, acting suspicious, follows him, then a fight ensues, at some point the younger, taller, and very likely quicker and more agile suspect gains an upper hand, and Zimmerman shoots and kills him in what he feels is an effort to save his own life. No worse than a hairy balding old man chasing kids in his neighborhood in his underwear is it???

The MEDIA has made a CIRCUS out of this case, when they really should have kept it wrapped a little tighter. Obama has interjected his opinion, professional athletes have interjected their opinions, on RACIST Black wrapper has made t-shirts calling the "Hispanic" Zimmerman a "Punk Azz Cracker." Hell, if the next time a BLACK person killed a white person somebody made a shirt with that Black person on it that said "Punk Azz SLUR" there'd be HELL to pay, but when that demographic incorrectly makes a racial slur against a person, it's not made a big issue. Where the hell does it stop???

Martin was not an innocent angelic little kid like the 4 or 5yr. old picture was intended to depict, and if he was suspended from school 3 times, at least once for illegal drugs, we can assume that he only got CAUGHT once, but that was very unlikely his FIRST time.... Likewise, Zimmerman is not completely innocent either, but as we speculate, if you had a picture of him with a bloody face, broken nose, and cut on the back of his head, then would you still being ready to hang him???

Until I have facts, I can't judge one way or the other, but with what we do have for reported facts, we can draw SOME conclusions...

Martin indeed wasn't a sweet 12-13yr. old child, as the media depicted him, but a 6'3" nearly full grown man, with a gold grill, who liked marijuana or sold it, and had some issues in school. His parents we're exceptionally responsible for him, since his dad didn't know until morning when he woke up that he wasn't home, he didn't even know he was DEAD until morning!!!! That's saying SOMETHING, and it's not good.

Zimmerman has a history, and was charged with assaulting a police officer when he shoved an undercover officer in a bar several years ago when the undercover agent and one of Zimmerman's friends got into an altercation. Zimmerman has been poorly portrayed by the media who used a mug shot looking picture. He's been noted to have called police several times, most of the time dealing with young black males being the "offenders" he has concerns about.

So if Zimmerman was in a scuffle, and the kid didn't have a MARK on him except the gun shot wound, it might be assumed the kid hit him first, and then continued hitting him, thus Zimmerman was unable to even return a punch to "mark" him. The report from the "Funeral Director" was that Martin didn't have a mark on him except the gunshot wound, IS telling in that if Zimmerman was beat up, then Martin must've likely thrown the first punch. The funeral director went as far as to say his hands weren't even marked, which proves nothing, as I've crushed a knuckle beating on a guy once (who ironically came running at me screaming he was gonna "Kill" me), and I've beaten the guy above (with the police intervention) without a single mark on my hands....

 

I find it interesting but for different reasons than you I'm sure. I got an e-mail on this story when it broke which was late Fri or Sat and there were only a couple of outlets reporting it. Fast forward 12 hours and there are hundreds if not thousands all with the same two paragraphs. We'll see how that plays out and I 'd anticipate ther are lots of media outlets looking for "expert" to say the opposite because that story will get 1000's of clicks. It's also worth noting and was widely reported early on that Trayvon Martins father was played the audio by police and said that wasn't Trayvon, he now says otherwise but whatever.

I found the story interesting mainly because it made me want to read up on voice biometrics which is actually pretty cool stuff. We'll see how that plays out in court if/when this case ever ends up there, my initial thoughts are it is not nearly the slam dunk the headlines make it seem to be. Also the eye witness claims seem to contradict this but there are some that support it as well, another interesting fact do you know that since DNA has been being used to overturn wrongful convictions something like 70% of the cases overturned had "eye witnesses" who were proven to be wrong by the DNA evidence. Sketchy.


Crickets chirping, the story below = 10,000 hits...same time frame Zimmerman/Martin = 30,000,000:

http://www.examiner.com/religion-po...rtin-like-outrage-over-for-allen-coon-burning

 

You guys hear of the NBC 911 recording that they spliced up which made Zimmerman's comments seem racial? I am not a sue happy person by any means, but if they really did splice up a tape to make Zimmerman seem racist and that put his life/credibility in danger, then I say sue the HELL out of those "journalists".

 

http://dmnewsi.com/2012/04/01/repor...ating-edited-911-tape-in-trayvon-martin-case/

Surely the National Broadcasting Company (NBC) would never fan the flames of racism… Check this out: NBC News has reportedly launched an internal investigation to find out how an edited version of a crucial 911 recording in the Trayvon Martin case came to be aired on the network. The investigation, reported by the Washington Post on Saturday, is in response to allegations that a recording of a conversation between a 911 operator and George Zimmerman, the man who shot Martin, was edited by NBC News in a way that would make Zimmerman’s actions in the case seem to be more racially motivated than they actually were. This story started to gain steam on Friday when a key difference between the actual 911 recording and a version that had been played on NBC’s TODAY SHOWwas pointed out by Sean Hannity on his FOX News program Friday night.


Here are the two versions, according to various reports appearing on Sunday, including this one on the Hollywood Reporter Web site:

In the first, edited version, Zimmerman is heard saying: “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”

In the second, unedited passage, he is heard saying: “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.”
And the dispatcher says: “OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?”
And that’s when Zimmerman says: “He looks black.”

The crucial difference is that, in the unedited version, Zimmerman is saying the person “looks black” because he was asked by the 911 dispatcher to determine the individual’s ethnicity. In the edited version, Zimmerman is made to seem as if he’s volunteering that this person who’s “up to no good” . . . “looks black.” In the wake of the editing revelation, NBC is being accused of deliberately editing the recording to make it seem as if the tape proves Zimmerman “racially profiled” Martin before their confrontation. If the edit was intentional, the critics are saying, then NBC is guilty of deliberately fanning the flames in a case that has the entire country debating issues of justice and race.

 

And we all know a frightenedangry/scared/distressed voice is often times more high pitched, and can sound like a completely different person than a normal voice.

Agreed Brett, he's got a pretty good case for public libel/slander and defamation of character, that I can see him getting a nice LUMP SUM from the media before all is said and done..... This could all be put to rest if the PUBLIC knew the true details of the whole thing. Show me a close-up of the back of his head, and the coon-eyes from the broken nose after a couple days, and the story would be essentially over. Yet even if he defended himself RIGHTFULLY, there are some who are still going to be pulling out the race card griping about it. Sadly, I never hear the Hispanic population, the Asian population, or the Jewish populus pulling out the racecard, only the African American populus. And if it weren't for Al and Jesse, hypcrites at the highest level, we may not have ever had to hear much about their "race card" either.

If Al and Jesse really wanted to make a difference, they'd be going down into the ghettos and stopping drug dealers from dealing crack, getting prostitutes off the streets, helping single mothers with their needs, encouraging "their" people to keep family units, etc.

 

Who cares the issue will always be to me how Zimmerman was not responsible with his CCW right. You don't go looking for a fight, and when Zimmerman got out of the car to look for the kid, he was looking for a fight carring a gun. Regardless of who started it, it's Zimmerman's responibilty NOT to put himself in a situation where he needs to pull his weapon. Zimmerman put himself in a bad situation, Zimmerman is at fault and needs to be held responsible. I would hope gun owners would police themselves, but I am not holding my breath.

NBC takes the liberal approach, shocker.

I will say even Hannity gave a pretty fair assessment of this event and so has O'reily

 

I agree with your assessment on Zimmermans decision making skills....but, that isn't a crime to put yourself in a bad situation just cause you are a CCW. It's only a crime if he pulled the gun and used it in a situation in which his safety wasn't being threatened.

The situation stinks, but I think the smell comes from both sides here. It's honestly a lose lose situation at this point in my mind for the sentencing. It will set a precedent for future cases regardless which way the chips fall for this one.

 

Whether or not if he's guilty, I think there is enough evidence to have him charged and let the court system process him. I've read that the police told him to back away and let them handle it, which he evidently did not do. I have also seen the media stir this issue up to increase their ratings. How are they going to feel if some hothead decides to retaliate against others not involved, but soley due to the color of their skin?

 

I don't disagree, but when get the right to carry a CCW and have a permit. It's his/her job to be a responible gun owner.

Trayvon is responible for his actions also, but he is a 17 year old kid, who was not looking for a fight or carring a gun.

 

Just because someone conceal carries does not mean they are looking for a fight. If they determine he broke the law he will be charged, if they prove his guilt he will be held responsible. Not a tough concept. One of the main reasons this has so much coverage is because of "racism", what's bothersome about that is even with all of the speculation there is still no real evidence that Zimmermans actions were race related or that he would have acted differently to an individual of a different race/skin color.

This one here, clearly race related but noone cares. No rallies, or big name civil rights protectors, or significant coverage by any major news network. Why is that?

http://www.examiner.com/religion-po...rtin-like-outrage-over-for-allen-coon-burning


Ya I'd say we got a long way to go with race relations in this country.

 

Making a decision to look into a "suspicious" individual in your neighborhood is often considered normal. This situation turned into a nightmare for both parties involved. We have no idea if he was irresponsible with his firearm or what Martins actions were. An altercation happened at some point and exactly how it all went down is still unclear. Apparently it's crytal clear to some.


Police report released(nothing new, just thought some might want to view):

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-03/69081607-29132322.pdf

 

When you follow someone, get out of your car and look for them, you are looking for a fight or call it a confrontation.

Adding a gun to a mix is taking an already bad situtaion and making it worse. Responsible gun owners do not put themsleves in those situations.

75 year old Detroit man shot and killed one of three men trying to break in his home this last week. IMO he should have shot all three.

There is a huge difference in protecting your home and property, and following someone, being told not to by the police and then getting out of your car to confront the person you have no idea is gulity of anything.

As a responsible gun owner you do not put YOURSELF in situations where you are forced to use your gun. You get put in situations that forces you to use your gun.

Zimmerman put himself in a situation where he may or may not have had to use his gun. He should have known better.

 

I know what your opinion is on the topic. I am just convinced we don't have all the facts to make very accurate "guesses", especially in regard to the actual confrontation not necessarily the getting out of the car part. Basically what you are saying is if you are a responsible gun owner you should not put yourself in Sanford because **Correction** 1 out of 150 will find themselves a victim of a violent crime there and 1 out of 16 for property crimes. The situation there holds some level of cause (not responsibility) with this event. All I'm saying is I can see how a person there might be more likely to conceal carry there and be involved with neighborhood watch.

 

No I am saying you don't follow someone, get told not to by the police and then get out of your car and go looking for them. When it goes bad and we all know it had a high % to go bad claim self defense and get away with being an idiot.

The actual confrontation does not matter to me, once Zimmerman step out of his car he was responisble for his actions.

Once again being a true victim, you are minding your own business and are attacked, robbed, etc by a thug is totally different than what zimmerman did. If I lived in Sanford I would own a gun, I just would not follow people, get told not to follow them but do, and then get out of my car to go look for them.

I do not look for a fight or a chance to be a hero

 

And how do you KNOW Trayvon wasn't looking for a fight??? How do you know for sure what is what??? Zimmerman was said to be treated on the scene for a bloody nose and cuts to his head, and you're saying that's not so??? Or are you saying Trayvon did this in self-defense??? Or are you saying the bloody nose and cuts were self-inflicted by Zimmerman to cover up the "murder???"

Enough evidence to prove what??? I think you're assuming just as much as Gary is. We don't really know the whole story. But if Zimmerman had a bloody nose, and cuts to the back of his head, then it can be assumed he acted in self-defense in which case, there is ENOUGH evidence to assume that he was acting in "Self Preservation," and therefore used force up to and including deadly force to protect his person. Don't let the media misportray that this was about COLOR... I'm pretty sure that if a WHITE kid had busted him in the nose and smashed his head against a curb as is claimed, he'd have put a bullet in the WHITE kid to protect himself from further damage as well.... I know I would, wouldn't you???

What do we really know???

The media has very poorly portrayed this whole thing, leading to a lot of outrage that may very well be misplaced.

Trayvon Martin is dead, and isn't the kid that was seen in the YEARS OLD picture that we all saw at first.

Zimmerman shot Martin, and Martin is dead, and has not wounds other than the Gun Shot Wound.

Zimmerman was reported to have had a bloodied nose, and cuts to the back of his head.

Martin was walking around "suspiciously" at night in a gated community, while it's raining, and was in some way involved in an encounter with Zimmerman.

Martin's own father didn't know his son was dead until the following morning.

Draw some conclusions based on what we KNOW, not the BS the media is reporting trying to mislead this whole country.... If it had been a Hispanic or White kid, would there be the same outcry??? What if the shooter had been Black, rather than Hispanic, and the Victim Hispanic??? Would we have the same outcry???

I think that we have far more questions than answers, and the ONE key piece that seals the deal is IF Zimmerman had a broken nose, and the cuts to the back of his head, and Martin indeed had only the GSW, then it's a pretty open and shut case of self-defense, and anything beyond that is unneeded.

Most of us would have wondered what some kid was doing lurking around in our neighborhood one a rainy night as well.... It was a school night, why wasn't he at home??? What was he doing in that "gated community" in the first place??? Why did the media feed us a MUG SHOT of the shooter, and a years old picture of Martin??? If you want to discredit one, it's only fair to discredit the other, show us the pic with the mopy pants, the middle fingers flashing and the "gold grill," to accurately portray who the kid is... Where'd he get the $$$ for the gold grill in the first place???

 

OHbowhntr

That is a great post, but I don't care'

They were on my property breaking into my car, now if I just chased them down for walking down the street, you would have a point.

Nice try though