Discussion:
OT: New eyewitness supports Zimmerman's claim of self-defense
(too old to reply)
Wilhelm Kuhlmann
2012-03-24 21:31:05 UTC
Permalink
Well, the plot thickens. The grand jury is going to have a hell of a
time sorting out eyewitness testimony and evaluating witness
credibility.

http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/news/state/witness-martin-attacked-zimmerman-03232012

Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman
Updated: Friday, 23 Mar 2012, 6:19 PM EDT
Published : Friday, 23 Mar 2012, 5:47 PM EDT

ORLANDO - A witness we haven't heard from before paints a much
different picture than we've seen so far of what happened the night 17-
year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed.

The night of that shooting, police say there was a witness who saw it
all.

Our sister station, FOX 35 in Orlando, has spoken to that witness.

What Sanford Police investigators have in the folder, they put
together on the killing of Trayvon Martin few know about.

The file now sits in the hands of the state attorney. Now that file is
just weeks away from being opened to a grand jury.

It shows more now about why police believed that night that George
Zimmerman shouldn't have gone to jail.

Zimmerman called 911 and told dispatchers he was following a teen. The
dispatcher told Zimmerman not to.

And from that moment to the shooting, details are few.

But one man's testimony could be key for the police.

"The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me:
'help, help…and I told him to stop and I was calling 911," he said.

Trayvon Martin was in a hoodie; Zimmerman was in red.

The witness only wanted to be identified as "John," and didn't not
want to be shown on camera.

His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up
Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of
Zimmerman.

"When I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on top beating
up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he
was dead at that point," John said.

Zimmerman says the shooting was self defense. According to information
released on the Sanford city website, Zimmerman said he was going back
to his SUV when he was attacked by the teen.

Sanford police say Zimmerman was bloody in his face and head, and the
back of his shirt was wet and had grass stains, indicating a struggle
took place before the shooting.


William Coleman (ramashiva)
popinjay999
2012-03-24 22:17:51 UTC
Permalink
Well, the plot thickens.  The grand jury is going to have a hell of a
time sorting out eyewitness testimony and evaluating witness
credibility.
<snip>
There must be some mistake. Your article says that Trayvon was 17
years old, but every picture of him I have seen on the news has shown
more like a 13 year old boy. Besides that, every picture of Trayvon
showed that he was smiling, but the pictures of Zimmerman show an
angry face. Obviously Trayvon was a happy innocent child, while
Zimmerman was a mean mean frowning person. I know, because I watch
the news.
BillB
2012-03-24 22:21:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by popinjay999
There must be some mistake. Your article says that Trayvon was 17
years old, but every picture of him I have seen on the news has shown
more like a 13 year old boy. Besides that, every picture of Trayvon
showed that he was smiling, but the pictures of Zimmerman show an
angry face. Obviously Trayvon was a happy innocent child, while
Zimmerman was a mean mean frowning person. I know, because I watch
the news.
Justice for Trayvon!
fffurken
2012-03-24 22:24:48 UTC
Permalink
Well, the plot thickens.  The grand jury is going to have a hell of a
time sorting out eyewitness testimony and evaluating witness
credibility.
<snip>
There must be some mistake.  Your article says that Trayvon was 17
years old, but every picture of him I have seen on the news has shown
more like a 13 year old boy.  Besides that, every picture of Trayvon
showed that he was smiling, but the pictures of Zimmerman show an
angry face.  Obviously Trayvon was a happy innocent child, while
Zimmerman was a mean mean frowning person.  I know, because I watch
the news.
His eyes looked *extremely* close together when I looked at a pic.

I'm not sayin nothin by that! I'm just saying he might be a retard.
Wilhelm Kuhlmann
2012-03-25 00:19:20 UTC
Permalink
There must be some mistake.  Your article says that Trayvon was 17
years old, but every picture of him I have seen on the news has shown
more like a 13 year old boy.
I have been laughing at that also. If you compare the photos we know
are recent to the "baby face" photos, it's obvious the media is trying
to suggest that Martin was a "little boy", as Mary Cutcher, one of the
eyewitnesses, called Martin. LMFAO! Martin was 6' 3" and a high
school football player.

It also appears that Martin may not actually have been the innocent
angel the media is trying to portray --

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/al-sharpton-dismisses-self-defense-argument-in-shooting-of-teen/

We’re also learning more about Trayvon Martin. According to reporters
he had been suspended from school. The International Business Times
says Martin’s suspension was due to last for 10 days. But what exactly
was he suspended for in the first place? Sources sympathetic to Martin
say he was suspended for “excessive tardiness.” However, a quick
review of both the local policies for Martin’s school, the Dr. Michael
M. Krop Senior High School, and of the Miami-Dade school district’s
district-wide policies, raise some doubts. According to Miami-Dade
policy, in order to get a suspension of 10 days, Martin would have had
to either commit “repeated, serious or habitual” acts of the
following:

• Cheating/Misrepresentation
• Confrontation with a staff member
• Defiance of school personnel
• Distribution of items or materials that are inappropriate
for an educational setting*
• Failure to comply with previously prescribed corrective
strategies
• False accusation
• Fighting (minor)
• Harassment (non-sexual or isolated)
• Instigative behavior
• Leaving school grounds without permission
• Joining clubs or groups not approved by the School Board
• Libel
• Petty theft (under $300.00)
• Use of profane or provocative language directed at someone
• Prohibited sales on school grounds (other than
controlled substances)
• Possession and/or use of tobacco products
• Slander
• Vandalism (minor)

Or even occasional offenses from the following:
• Assault/Threat against a non-staff member
• Breaking and Entering/Burglary
• Bullying (repeated harassment)*
• Disruption on campus/Disorderly conduct
• Fighting (serious)
• Harassment (Civil Rights)**
• Hazing (misdemeanor)
• Possession or use of alcohol and/or controlled
substances
• Possession of simulated weapons
• Sexual harassment**
• Trespassing
• Vandalism (major)

Or of the following:
• Grand theft (over $300.00)
• Hate crime
• Hazing (felony)
• Motor vehicle theft
• Other major crimes/incidents
• Sale and/or distribution of alcohol and/or controlled substances
• Sex offenses (other) (including possession and/or
distribution of obscene or lewd materials)

Or possibly even of the following, each of which carries a minimum
suspension of ten days:

• Aggravated assault
• Aggravated battery against a non-staff member
• Armed robbery
• Arson
• Assault/Threat against M-DCPS employees or persons
conducting official business
• Battery or Aggravated battery against M-DCPS employees
or persons conducting official business*
• Homicide
• Kidnapping/Abduction
• Making a false report/threat against the school*
• Sexual battery
• Possession, use, sale, or distribution of firearms, explosives,
destructive devices, and other weapons.

But whatever the reason, it‘s a case that you’ll probably be hearing
more about in the future.


William Coleman (ramashiva)
brewmaster
2012-03-25 00:26:52 UTC
Permalink
There must be some mistake.  Your article says that Trayvon was 17
years old, but every picture of him I have seen on the news has shown
more like a 13 year old boy.
I have been laughing at that also.  If you compare the photos we know
are recent to the "baby face" photos, it's obvious the media is trying
to suggest that Martin was a "little boy", as Mary Cutcher, one of the
eyewitnesses, called Martin.  LMFAO!  Martin was 6' 3" and a high
school football player.
This reminds me of the Oklahoma City (is that right?) store owner who
shot the thug trying to rob him (I'm think Ersland?). BillB insists
this store owner shot "a child", when i fact the robber (who was 15)
was over 6', was wearing a ski mask, and pointing a gun. That isn't
"a child". It will be interesting to see how the Treyvan Martin thing
plays out, especially since the prez has said weighed in on the side
of frying Zimmerman.
It also appears that Martin may not actually have been the innocent
angel the media is trying to portray --
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/al-sharpton-dismisses-self-defense-ar...
We’re also learning more about Trayvon Martin. According to reporters
he had been suspended from school. The International Business Times
says Martin’s suspension was due to last for 10 days. But what exactly
was he suspended for in the first place? Sources sympathetic to Martin
say he was suspended for “excessive tardiness.” However, a quick
review of both the local policies for Martin’s school, the Dr. Michael
M. Krop Senior High School, and of the Miami-Dade school district’s
district-wide policies, raise some doubts. According to Miami-Dade
policy, in order to get a suspension of 10 days, Martin would have had
to either commit “repeated, serious or habitual” acts of the
• Cheating/Misrepresentation
• Confrontation with a staff member
• Defiance of school personnel
• Distribution of items or materials that are inappropriate
for an educational setting*
• Failure to comply with previously prescribed corrective
strategies
• False accusation
• Fighting (minor)
• Harassment (non-sexual or isolated)
• Instigative behavior
• Leaving school grounds without permission
• Joining clubs or groups not approved by the School Board
• Libel
• Petty theft (under $300.00)
• Use of profane or provocative language directed at someone
• Prohibited sales on school grounds (other than
controlled substances)
• Possession and/or use of tobacco products
• Slander
• Vandalism (minor)
• Assault/Threat against a non-staff member
• Breaking and Entering/Burglary
• Bullying (repeated harassment)*
• Disruption on campus/Disorderly conduct
• Fighting (serious)
• Harassment (Civil Rights)**
• Hazing (misdemeanor)
• Possession or use of alcohol and/or controlled
substances
• Possession of simulated weapons
• Sexual harassment**
• Trespassing
• Vandalism (major)
• Grand theft (over $300.00)
• Hate crime
• Hazing (felony)
• Motor vehicle theft
• Other major crimes/incidents
• Sale and/or distribution of alcohol and/or controlled substances
• Sex offenses (other) (including possession and/or
distribution of obscene or lewd materials)
Or possibly even of the following, each of which carries a minimum
• Aggravated assault
• Aggravated battery against a non-staff member
• Armed robbery
• Arson
• Assault/Threat against M-DCPS employees or persons
conducting official business
• Battery or Aggravated battery against M-DCPS employees
or persons conducting official business*
• Homicide
• Kidnapping/Abduction
• Making a false report/threat against the school*
• Sexual battery
• Possession, use, sale, or distribution of firearms, explosives,
destructive devices, and other weapons.
But whatever the reason, it‘s a case that you’ll probably be hearing
more about in the future.
William Coleman  (ramashiva)
Abbey Johnsson
2012-03-25 12:52:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by brewmaster
This reminds me of the Oklahoma City (is that right?) store owner who
shot the thug trying to rob him (I'm think Ersland?). BillB insists
this store owner shot "a child", when i fact the robber (who was 15)
was over 6', was wearing a ski mask, and pointing a gun. That isn't
"a child". It will be interesting to see how the Treyvan Martin thing
plays out, especially since the prez has said weighed in on the side
of frying Zimmerman.
"I'm think" ?

"i fact" ?

"prez has said weighed" ?

lol- you better quit criticizing other people's grammar.

----- 
brewmaster
2012-03-25 15:56:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbey Johnsson
Post by brewmaster
This reminds me of the Oklahoma City (is that right?) store owner who
shot the thug trying to rob him (I'm think Ersland?). BillB insists
this store owner shot "a child", when i fact the robber (who was 15)
was over 6', was wearing a ski mask, and pointing a gun. That isn't
"a child". It will be interesting to see how the Treyvan Martin thing
plays out, especially since the prez has said weighed in on the side
of frying Zimmerman.
"I'm think" ?
"i fact" ?
"prez has said weighed" ?
lol- you better quit criticizing other people's grammar.
----- 
I haven't criticized anybody's grammar for years.

And mine are understandable...I was drunk.
--
Brew "part of the 100%" Master

_____________________________________________________________________ 
Will in New Haven
2012-03-25 00:28:30 UTC
Permalink
Well, the plot thickens.  The grand jury is going to have a hell of a
time sorting out eyewitness testimony and evaluating witness
credibility.
<snip>
There must be some mistake.  Your article says that Trayvon was 17
years old, but every picture of him I have seen on the news has shown
more like a 13 year old boy.  Besides that, every picture of Trayvon
showed that he was smiling, but the pictures of Zimmerman show an
angry face.  Obviously Trayvon was a happy innocent child, while
Zimmerman was a mean mean frowning person.  I know, because I watch
the news.
It is very important for the public to know that Trayvon was a child,
even if he was not a child.

--
Will in New Haven
Dutch
2012-03-25 23:20:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will in New Haven
Post by popinjay999
Post by Wilhelm Kuhlmann
Well, the plot thickens. The grand jury is going to have a hell of a
time sorting out eyewitness testimony and evaluating witness
credibility.
<snip>
There must be some mistake. Your article says that Trayvon was 17
years old, but every picture of him I have seen on the news has shown
more like a 13 year old boy. Besides that, every picture of Trayvon
showed that he was smiling, but the pictures of Zimmerman show an
angry face. Obviously Trayvon was a happy innocent child, while
Zimmerman was a mean mean frowning person. I know, because I watch
the news.
It is very important for the public to know that Trayvon was a child,
even if he was not a child.
Yeah, because its OK to stalk and shoot teenagers who are walking along
minding their own business because you know what teenagers can be like,
especially darkies wearing hoodies. BAM!, that fucker won't cause no mo
trouble.
Robert Ladd
2012-03-26 06:06:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dutch
Post by Will in New Haven
Post by popinjay999
Post by Wilhelm Kuhlmann
Well, the plot thickens. The grand jury is going to have a hell of a
time sorting out eyewitness testimony and evaluating witness
credibility.
<snip>
There must be some mistake. Your article says that Trayvon was 17
years old, but every picture of him I have seen on the news has shown
more like a 13 year old boy. Besides that, every picture of Trayvon
showed that he was smiling, but the pictures of Zimmerman show an
angry face. Obviously Trayvon was a happy innocent child, while
Zimmerman was a mean mean frowning person. I know, because I watch
the news.
It is very important for the public to know that Trayvon was a child,
even if he was not a child.
Yeah, because its OK to stalk and shoot teenagers who are walking along
minding their own business because you know what teenagers can be like,
especially darkies wearing hoodies. BAM!, that fucker won't cause no mo
trouble.
It's possible that it happened that way. But then again, I'm going to guess
that you are making up that scenario from the *totally unbiased* media
information you've seen. Unless an unimpeachable source that saw the entire
confrontation steps forward, I'm going to guess that we'll never know
exactly what happened.

I don't have any fondness for Zimmerman, but then why would I with the
information that was released about him? You want to trust the media's
information, yet their job is to grab your attention because they are news
whore's. And like whores, they tell you what you want to hear.

The irony of this is that most of the same people that are lobbying to have
many death row inmates spared because they didn't have enough information to
convict, are willing to convict in this case with the hearsay that has
mushroomed from the media. Evidence, that may be quite scant compared to
many of those protested cases.

With hundreds of witnesses and thousands of hours of reviewing the video
tapes, we will probably never know what really happened with Kennedy either.
Yet with an amount of evidence miniscule compared to what we have in the
Kennedy shooting, so many of you are convinced you know what happened in
this event.

In both cases I'd like to know where to drape my outrage, but it's just a
cross I have to bear, since I'm human and did not physically witness either
event.

Robert Ladd
Pepe Papon
2012-03-26 16:45:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Ladd
The irony of this is that most of the same people that are lobbying to have
many death row inmates spared because they didn't have enough information to
convict, are willing to convict in this case with the hearsay that has
mushroomed from the media.
False. I don't see anyone willing to convict without a fair trial.
You're making the error of placing the court of law standard on the
court of public opinion.

Based on the available evidence, it sounds to me as if Zimmerman is
guilty. My opinion is subject to change if additional evidence comes
to light. If I were on a jury, given the available evidence, I
would have to vote "not guilty".

See the difference?
bratt
2012-03-26 17:08:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pepe Papon
Post by Robert Ladd
The irony of this is that most of the same people that are lobbying to have
many death row inmates spared because they didn't have enough information to
convict, are willing to convict in this case with the hearsay that has
mushroomed from the media.
False. I don't see anyone willing to convict without a fair trial.
You're making the error of placing the court of law standard on the
court of public opinion.
Based on the available evidence, it sounds to me as if Zimmerman is
guilty. My opinion is subject to