The Trayvon Martin The Media Didnt Want You To Know! By BILL WHITTLE Pt 1

whatsinaname

New member
Jul 2, 2013
218
0
0
There is no evidence that Martin assaulted Zimmerman. All we know is one of them must have started it, but we have no idea which one. Flip a coin.
There is evidence that Martin assaulted Zimmerman. Of course there is.

As for who hit who first, there is evidence as well in support of Martin being the aggressor, the placement of the keys for one example. But you do not want to look at that. Which is fine. But you openly admitting that would never happen.

Sure. And where something is merely possible do you presume innocence as I do?
If I was making a judgement, I would of course presume innocence without concrete proof, but I am not making a judgement. I am forming an opinion. There is again a difference. However I assume you presume Zimmerman is innocent in your judgement correct?

Actually we know that Martin did NOT jump out and attack Zimmerman. We know that they had a brief conversation first. Whoever struck first they were aware of each other for a period of time before that, as they were talking.

Neither of them jumped and attacked. One of them escalated to violence after exchanging words.
V said that it was Zimmerman hiding in the shadows. I said IT COULD BE said that Martin was hiding in the shadows. Not that he was, not that he attacked, but that IT COULD BE SAID. As in quite possible. Sorry if that was misunderstood.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
The autopsy report effectively cleared Martin of any codeine use. He was not using lean and had not used it in however long it takes codeine to clear out of your system.
You keep ignoring that it showed liver damage in an otherwise healthy young man of a few weeks short of 18 consistent with the abuse of "lean".


Please recall the wonderful statement by Henry David Thoreau regarding circumstantial evidence.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
You keep ignoring that it showed liver damage in an otherwise healthy young man of a few weeks short of 18 consistent with the abuse of "lean".

Please recall the wonderful statement by Henry David Thoreau regarding circumstantial evidence.
That liver damage is consistent with many things. Why do you presume guilt on such a flimsy basis?
 

whatsinaname

New member
Jul 2, 2013
218
0
0
You keep ignoring that it showed liver damage in an otherwise healthy young man of a few weeks short of 18 consistent with the abuse of "lean".


Please recall the wonderful statement by Henry David Thoreau regarding circumstantial evidence.
This is where I form my opinion, but to be honest I have never liked it in law, and I still say that even though it has let people get away with criminal activities on me. I just can not fathom a person who is truly not guilty suffering because it looked like he was guilty. I will form my opinion, but I will not judge. Thankfully that is why I am NOT in the law field.
 

whatsinaname

New member
Jul 2, 2013
218
0
0
That liver damage is consistent with many things. Why do you presume guilt on such a flimsy basis?
It is not just the liver damage. It is 4 factors

1. Liver Damage
2. Self testimony
3. 2 of the 3 ingredients
4. evidence of other drugs also consistent with self testimony.

All dots combined, what picture would most people get?
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,490
11
38
While I don't know about "official" it was widely known in the community (which perhaps it should be pointed out was a mixed race community) that he was a neighborhood watch volunteer, and indeed a captain in it.

Merely because the prosecution decided to use an emotional argument of "want to be cop" doesn't change the fact that he was part of a legitimate neighborhood watch.
The short answer is that if what he did was part of being a legitimate neighborhood watch then he would have been instructed to do it and how, and identified as someone doing it, with the cooperation and support of the truly legitimate neighborhood watch—commonly called the police. Instead, the real neighborhood watch explicitly told him to cease his illegitimate actions and return to his car. He disobeyed.

As with real police officers in operating in plainclothes, how is any ordinary person supposed to know he's not facing just some random thug when zimmerman* approaches? Eventually cops grasped the danger they were creating by their 'disguises', and now train and equip themselves, because not establishing legitimate authority costs innocent lives.

This guy 'legitimately' interfering with an ordinary person's lawful right to peaceably go about their business, wore no identifying uniform or badges, had received no serious training either in the laws of arrest (stopping people) or tactics (how to do it), or even in what constituted behaviour that should be noted. Further, he deliberately disobeyed what few instructions he had received from the truly legitimate authorities. If he indeed had any legitimate business stalking martin, the authorities didn't think so.

All one can say is that in a highly politicized trial Zimmerman was not convicted of the offences he was charged with under the misbegotten laws of Florida, and must be presumed innocent of them. A far different thing from being not guilty of carrying out a homicide that a trivial exercise of simple common sense could have predicted and avoided. It's why he was instructed to disengage. Carried to that horrific end, it was inarguably criminal stupidity.

I can quite agree that the prosecution followed the police (remember how long it took to charge Zimmerman at all) in bungling the case, and certainly the shenanigans on the bench were no help in arriving at a just and proper result. But who in those parts—apart from the Martins and a few of their friends—had any interest in that, if it meant 'one of ours' being sanctioned?
-----------------------------

*After this result, it's clear the proper and appropriate action when approached/stalked by a zimmerman is to shoot first aiming for centre of body mass. At least in Florida.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
Merely allow me to point out that the "misbegotten law [in] Florida" under which he was acquitted is the same law of self-defence as in Canada or Connecticut.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,490
11
38
Merely allow me to point out that the "misbegotten law [in] Florida" under which he was acquitted is the same law of self-defence as in Canada or Connecticut.
You are the lawyer, but as I understand the concept of exculpatory self-defence in Canada, it is very strictly limited to the minimal amount of force necessary and justifiable to protect oneself and disengage safely. Nothing I've heard or read says it in any way entitles an armed person to stalk someone, provoke an altercation and then excuses them from shooting and killing the unarmed person they alarmed.

I'll be happy to have my prejudices confirmed if you cite me the Florida law that does. Or Connecticut law, although I fail to see its relevance.
 

Perry Mason

Well-known member
Aug 20, 2001
4,682
208
63
Here
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.
Proverbs 18:2

 

red

you must be fk'n kid'g me
Nov 13, 2001
17,572
8
38
Isaiah 59:4
No one enters suit justly; no one goes to law honestly; they rely on empty pleas, they speak lies, they conceive mischief and give birth to iniquity.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
There is evidence that Martin assaulted Zimmerman. Of course there is.
There is no proof he did. We know that he hit Zimmerman but if that was in self defence then that is not assault.

As for who hit who first, there is evidence as well in support of Martin being the aggressor, the placement of the keys for one example. But you do not want to look at that. Which is fine. But you openly admitting that would never happen.
The location of the keys only confirms that Martin confronted Zimmerman. Martin had every right to confront him and if he only confronted him verbally that is not an assault, in fact it is perfectly reasonable to confront someone who is following you. If Zimmerman responded to a verbal confrontation with violence then Martin acted in self defence.

However I assume you presume Zimmerman is innocent in your judgement correct?
Absolutely. My position is that we don't know who started it. Each have relatively equally troubling histories of violent or questionable behaviour, each has evidence of a history of substance abuse, each appears to have entered the situation with an aggressive and hot headed demeanour.

There is no evidence whatsoever as to who initiated violence and so there is a reasonable doubt about it and a presumption of innocence both ways.

I said IT COULD BE said that Martin was hiding in the shadows. Not that he was, not that he attacked, but that IT COULD BE SAID. As in quite possible. Sorry if that was misunderstood.
We know that nobody attacked from the shadows. One or the other may have been hiding in the shadows but we know that they saw each other and both spoke words to each other before whatever initiated the violence.

There are witnesses who heard that conversation. So nobody violently jumped from the shadows. Someone may have stepped out of the shadows to speak but that is perfectly legal behaviour.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
It is not just the liver damage. It is 4 factors

1. Liver Damage
2. Self testimony
3. 2 of the 3 ingredients
4. evidence of other drugs also consistent with self testimony.

All dots combined, what picture would most people get?
In other words wholesale speculation that is meant to demonize Martin and which is absolutely totally and completely irrelevant to the case.

We know that at the time he was killed he did not have even a trace of codeine in his system so it absolutely had no effect on his behaviour whatsoever.

Zimmerman has a documented history of substance abuse as well which is just as irrelevant. In his case it isn't even speculative a court sent him to rehab.

On top of that you have absolutely no idea whether this kid had ever even tried the stuff. Lots of teenagers of every generation have adopted behaviour, clothes, etc., from the drug culture without partaking. Not everybody who wore a tie-dyed T-shirt did acid and not everybody who bought watermelon drink mixed it with codeine. It probably is the preferred drink because you look cool and edgy having it.

He was clearly not a habitual user, with not even a trace in his system, and there is no actual evidence that he was anything more than a 17 year old braggart.

This whole discussion is speculative nonsense based on little more than superstitions about black teens.
 

Ironhead

Son of the First Nation
Sep 13, 2008
7,014
0
36
Regardless of what the media thinks of and has made Zimmerman out to be, for defenders of Martin we see he is not the innocent 'child' everyone was led to believe.
Obviously each has his own faults.

I saw the media had already tried and convicted Zimmerman ASAP. Within a couple of days it seemed the trial was just a formality and all that it was going to do was tell us how long Zimmerman was going to get.
Then the verdict came in ..... well it was a 'miscarriage of justice', 'a modern lynching', 'justice failed Martin', etc. Why ?

If everyone wanted Zimmerman to be guilty, why have a trail ? Just toss him in some prison and within a reasonable amount of time let him, and the world, know how long he will serve.

Next time do not bother with a trial, just take a survey of who the people, guided by the media, likes better and 'stick it' to the other party.
 

Prim0

Meh
Aug 12, 2008
791
0
16
After reading through all these posts...I no longer give a flying F-ck who did what. There is evidence that both of them were idiots and we'll never know what really happened. By law, the guy had to go free.

The important thing I noticed is that we need to clear up the differences between latinos and hispanics.

I believe that hispanic refers to those with ancestors from Spain. They are essentially european.

Latinos tends to refer to those of a more native carribean/south american ancestry.

In my opinion, none of it matters. Everyone is different and I think everyone is responsible for their own actions. Perhaps some day we'll have some foolproof way of determining who did what and what they were thinking when they did it. Until then, we in the States have to use the justice system and count on each other to be fair judges when in a jury.
 

GPIDEAL

Prolific User
Jun 27, 2010
23,359
11
38
So can you say, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the liver damage was caused by abusing lean? And I've only personally called one member a racist, after he started with the name calling.
You don't need to rely on the standard of 'reasonable doubt' to say his liver was caused by Lean, just a preponderance of evidence (was it likely?)
 

GPIDEAL

Prolific User
Jun 27, 2010
23,359
11
38
It cleared him of having anything like that in his system that night.

Saying that liver damage was the result of lean is highly speculative. Lots of things cause liver damage. Maybe he was drinking alcohol and taking Tylenol for the hangover that is a larger risk of liver damage than the antihistamines in lean. One that afflicts more people too because of the piss poor job Tylenol does of warning not to use it for a hangover.

This is the "Trayvon is guilty until proven innocent" bullshit double standard. You have no idea if he ever really used lean, particularly no idea if he used it in the truly excessive quantities that would cause liver damage in a 17 year old, but you figure it must be true because of what, a bs online brag by a highschool kid?

Toronto kids once answered a school drug survey saying the overwhelming majority of them had tried heroin. It was bs. Kids like to brag about fucking girls they never fucked and doing drugs they never touched. Lean is a hip hop pop star drug it is cool to say you know how to make it.

In light of having none in his system he clearly wasn't a habitual user if indeed he ever did even use it.

Fuji, if TM can get alcohol, HE WOULDN'T NEED TO MAKE LEAN. So your theory that his liver damage was caused by alcohol and Tylenol doesn't make sense.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
You don't need to rely on the standard of 'reasonable doubt' to say his liver was caused by Lean, just a preponderance of evidence (was it likely?)
Why would that even be the likely explanation. It seems far fetched to me. The dosage required to cause liver damage is huge and there is no evidence to support that sort of usage.

Meanwhile there after unfortunately far too many ordinary things that can cause liver damage.

Like taking Tylenol to cure a hangover.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,011
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
Fuji, if TM can get alcohol, HE WOULDN'T NEED TO MAKE LEAN. So you're theory that his liver damage was caused by alcohol and Tylenol doesn't make sense.
What world do you live in where it is easier for a 17 year old to get codeine than alcohol???
 

Perry Mason

Well-known member
Aug 20, 2001
4,682
208
63
Here
What world do you live in where it is easier for a 17 year old to get codeine than alcohol???
Not your world, that's for sure!

But in the real world, that's what happens.

The drinking age in Florida is 21... in case that the facts matter to you!

Perry
 

GPIDEAL

Prolific User
Jun 27, 2010
23,359
11
38
There is no evidence that Martin assaulted Zimmerman. All we know is one of them must have started it, but we have no idea which one. Flip a coin.

Huh? How the hell did GZ get those face and head injuries? How did TM manage to get on top of stocky GZ? The position of the combatants and the nature of the injuries to GZ suggest that TM assaulted GZ because he didn't like being followed or investigated.

I had lunch with a friend who heard the transcript or 911 voice recordings off some internet site and he said that all the operator told GZ was 'we don't need you to do that', suggesting, if you do, you can't blame us for the consequences, however later while on the phone with 911, the operator said 'so what do you see now?'.

GZ was checking TM's whereabouts until help arrived. If he was tailing him, he wouldn't have lost site of him.
 
Toronto Escorts