Protesters rally over Florida teen's death, demand arrest

[Gravis Marketing]

Some more bombshells from Zimmerman's father that buttresses jimrtex's and J.J.'s case against Trayvon. Note the text in bold below - it vindicates Zimmerman.

[Zimmerman's father] said his son had just made dinner for his wife and was heading to Target the night of the NBA All Star game when he spotted Trayvon, who he didn’t recognize as a resident. He thought Trayvon looked suspicious, because there had been a rash of break-ins, and instead of walking on a main sidewalk, Trayvon was walking in a paved path that goes behind two sets of townhouses.

George Zimmerman called police, and started “walking in the same general direction to see where the individual was going,” and get an address for police.

At one point, he said, Trayvon approached him saying, ‘Do you have an f-ing problem?’ George replied no and reached for his cell phone.

Trayvon “punched him in the nose, his nose was broken, and he was knocked to the concrete.” Robert Zimmerman said. “It’s my understanding Trayvon Martin got on top of him and just started beating him in the face, in his nose, hitting his head on the concrete.”

“After nearly a minute of being beaten,” Robert Zimmerman said George tried – with Trayvon still on top of him – to move away from the concrete onto the grass. In doing so, the gun he kept in a holster on his waist was exposed.

“Trayvon Martin said something to the effect of ‘you’re going to die now’ or you’re gonna die tonight’ -- something to that effect,” he said. “He continued to beat George. At some point, George pulled his pistol and did what he did.”

In other points, he said:

• He insisted that it’s George heard screaming in the 911 video.

• He believes that the girl who claims she was on the phone with Trayon in the minutes that led up to the encounter is not telling the truth.

• George had a broken nose and two cuts on his scalp.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/29/2720704/george-zimmermans-dad-trayvon.html#storylink=cpy

[Invisible Obama]

Parents will say anything for their children sometimes and this is the first time that this particular statement has come up, it hasn't even been mentioned by the police as part of Zimmerman's official statement. I don't believe one word of anything this father says and it's not really admissible, since he was not there and only has secondhand information.

[Beet]

I don't consider anything the father says to be anything more than entertainment value, because the father wasn't there. That claim's only significant if it is relaying a claim made by Zimmerman himself. But even then, there's no evidence whatsoever to support it.

[IDS Judicial Overlord John Dibble]

His father wasn't there and was not a witness in any way. He's also got an obvious bias. Why should anyone care what he has to say on the matter?

[J. J.]

I don't consider anything the father says to be anything more than entertainment value, because the father wasn't there. That claim's only significant if it is relaying a claim made by Zimmerman himself. But even then, there's no evidence whatsoever to support it.

I think the police report noted the injury on the back of the head and the bloody nose.  I would not call that conclusive.

[Gravis Marketing]

His father wasn't there and was not a witness in any way. He's also got an obvious bias. Why should anyone care what he has to say on the matter?

Well, that's one perspective. Other people prefer to consider all the evidence, which muddies the waters and shows that we can't rush to judgment.

[jimrtex]

"Pursue" is not the same as "follow?"  Well then he was "following" Martin.  And would any of this have happened if he had NOT "followed" Martin? (with a gun)

Pursue:  Follow (someone or something) to catch or attack them.

Follow:  Go after (someone) in order to observe or monitor.

Zimmerman observed something suspicious and called the police.  He gave a description of Martin, what he appeared to be doing.  After he observed Martin running, he began to follow him so that he could continue to observe him.  After the dispatcher told him that it was not necessary to follow him, he acknowledged the request.

Or do you think the dispatcher actually meant "we don't need you to catch or attack the subject"?

Zimmerman said that "he ran" which indicates that Martin was no longer in sight.  And he told the dispatcher to tell the officer where his truck was.

I don't know why Zimmerman left his truck.  Maybe he got out of his truck to wait for the police officer, and then decided to go look behind the townhouses.

It is your conjecture that he followed the instructions of the dispatcher to stop looking for Martin.  Many would disagree with you.  Are you really assuming he did just because he "okay."  Hard to believe given that he got out of his car with his gun and the person he was following is now dead.

The dispatcher did not tell him to stop looking for Martin.   "Are you looking for the subject?"  "Yeah"  "OK, we don't need you to do that" "OK".

You were told by someone that Zimmerman pursued Martin, even after being ordered not to do so.  Since this conformed to your prejudices, you adopted it as your belief.  After I pointed out that the tape does not support such a conclusion, you think I am making the conjecture.

Zimmerman shot Martin.  Martin is dead.  That does not mean that Zimmerman was following him.

[Bacon King]

I'll just post this link right here.

The killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman — the case where nothing makes sense, nothing — gained greater clarity in the last couple days. The story put forth by the Sanford Police Department (SPD) and by Zimmerman “friend” Joe Oliver is starting to crumble.

The SPD video that ABC News aired last night raised serious doubts about Zimmerman’s account of a life-and-death struggle. Then, the mortician who prepared Trayvon’s body for burial told MSNBC last night that the 17-year-old’s body didn’t show any signs of violence to support Zimmerman’s account. Now, the work of the lead detective on the Zimmerman case looms large. Justice might be blind, but she’s not dumb. And lead detective Investigator Chris Serino set out to prove it.

[jimrtex]

Watch in the middle of the video when the one cop is putting his jacket in the trunk of the car. The other cop comes around and is checking the back of his head.

"The injuries that made it sound as though he really should have been on a stretcher are not apparent in this tape at all," said Marcia Clark, the former prosecutor in the O.J. Simpson trial. "He moves freely. He moves fluidly, not like someone who has just been through a beating in any way, shape or form, someone's whose head has been pounded on the pavement as hard as described, someone who's nose was broken and bleeding. That tells you a great deal."

Marcia Clark is a paid performer, and trained as a lawyer.  She would try to present things in a way that conform to people's prejudices, so that they would jump to conclusions.

The police report says that the policeman didn't notice the wound on the back of the head until he was putting the cuffs on.  It sounds like he was sitting in the back of the squad car when the Sanford Fire Department was treating him.

And you can't deny the policeman was looking at the back of Zimmerman's head.  What did Marcia Clark say that he was doing.

Have you seen the reverse angle video from the garage?  See if there is something that you missed in the first video completely.

[jimrtex]

Then, the mortician who prepared Trayvon’s body for burial told MSNBC last night that the 17-year-old’s body didn’t show any signs of violence to support Zimmerman’s account.

When Nancy Grace interviewed the mortician, he said that when he was doing the preparation, that he didn't really know anything about the circumstances of Martin's death.  He was in Fort Lauderdale.   Remember that the reason for Martin being at the morgue so long was because the funeral home did not pick up the body for 24 hours after the autopsy had been completed.

When asked about where on his chest Martin had been shot, the mortician was unable to say, because that is where the autopsy had been done (I assume meaning that was where he had been cut open).

The mortician did not say that the body didn't show any signs of violence such as bruised hands.  He said that he did not notice any injuries to the hand.

[jimrtex]

Watch in the middle of the video when the one cop is putting his jacket in the trunk of the car.  The other cop comes around and is checking the back of his head.

Here's the video itself, for the lazy who don't want to search for it.

Go to the City of Sanford web site and you can see the complete video of all their surveillance cameras and not the edited media versions.

[jimrtex]

Now, the work of the lead detective on the Zimmerman case looms large. Justice might be blind, but she’s not dumb. And lead detective Investigator Chris Serino set out to prove it

MSNBC cut a minute out of the 911 call, which started with the sister (who also sounded very young) of the 13-YO calling 911, and then after determining that she didn't appear to a direct witness, asked to talk to her brother.  He said he had seen two men fighting and then his dog got loose, and so he didn't see the shooting.

It then went to an interview with the mother.  They didn't ask whether the police had interviewed the daughter; nor whether they had asked the Mother what she had observed.

[Beet]

Watch in the middle of the video when the one cop is putting his jacket in the trunk of the car.  The other cop comes around and is checking the back of his head.

Here's the video itself, for the lazy who don't want to search for it.

Go to the City of Sanford web site and you can see the complete video of all their surveillance cameras and not the edited media versions.

Here's that video. You get more angles, no annoying logos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WWDNbQUgm4&feature=youtu.be

[IDS Judicial Overlord John Dibble]

His father wasn't there and was not a witness in any way. He's also got an obvious bias. Why should anyone care what he has to say on the matter?

Well, that's one perspective. Other people prefer to consider all the evidence, which muddies the waters and shows that we can't rush to judgment.

No, it's brute fact. His father wasn't a witness. What part of that do you not understand? His father's statements aren't evidence. He would not be allowed to take the stand and present these in a court of law because at best his statements are hearsay.

[Gravis Marketing]

His father wasn't there and was not a witness in any way. He's also got an obvious bias. Why should anyone care what he has to say on the matter?

Well, that's one perspective. Other people prefer to consider all the evidence, which muddies the waters and shows that we can't rush to judgment.

No, it's brute fact. His father wasn't a witness. What part of that do you not understand? His father's statements aren't evidence. He would not be allowed to take the stand and present these in a court of law because at best his statements are hearsay.

Zimmerman's father is innocent until proven guilty - do not rush to judgment. We have to consider all the evidence.

jimrtex, J.J., BigSkyBob, help me out here. He doesn't get it.

[Invisible Obama]

Zimmerman's father doesn't have any evidence, he's only going off his son's statement and that is secondhand information to him. He was not a witness, as he was nowhere near the scene to corroborate anything his son says.

On edit, reading again, I'm starting to detect some sarcasm here.

[IDS Judicial Overlord John Dibble]

His father wasn't there and was not a witness in any way. He's also got an obvious bias. Why should anyone care what he has to say on the matter?

Well, that's one perspective. Other people prefer to consider all the evidence, which muddies the waters and shows that we can't rush to judgment.

No, it's brute fact. His father wasn't a witness. What part of that do you not understand? His father's statements aren't evidence. He would not be allowed to take the stand and present these in a court of law because at best his statements are hearsay.

Zimmerman's father is innocent until proven guilty - do not rush to judgment. We have to consider all the evidence.

jimrtex, J.J., BigSkyBob, help me out here. He doesn't get it.

Well played, sir.

[BigSkyBob]

His father wasn't there and was not a witness in any way. He's also got an obvious bias. Why should anyone care what he has to say on the matter?

Well, that's one perspective. Other people prefer to consider all the evidence, which muddies the waters and shows that we can't rush to judgment.

No, it's brute fact. His father wasn't a witness. What part of that do you not understand? His father's statements aren't evidence. He would not be allowed to take the stand and present these in a court of law because at best his statements are hearsay.

Zimmerman's father is retelling Zimmerman's account of what happened. In an American trial, that is "hearsay." In a trial by public opinion, it has whatever weight anyone listening places on it.

There is one very interesting point the father noted: Zimmerman pulled the trigger not because he was being beaten, per se, but, rather, because Martin stated he intended to kill him.

[So the Heroes Fall]

I'm kind of hoping this helps deal a massive blow to the mostly joke organizations that are "neighborhood watches" and people realize that they are a stupid joke and quit volunteering or dealing with them.

[All life is a blur of Republicans and meat.]

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2012/03/neighborhood-watch-trailer-pulled-in-light-of-trayvon-martin-case

I wonder if they'll end up shelving this if the situation gets even more intense. I doubt it but it wouldn't exactly be a big loss even if they did, the movie looks pretty terrible.

Maybe they'll suddenly start pushing the alien angle really hard in the marketing. (The pulled trailer trailer didn't push the alien thing at all.)

[Ogre Mage]

Watch in the middle of the video when the one cop is putting his jacket in the trunk of the car. The other cop comes around and is checking the back of his head.

"The injuries that made it sound as though he really should have been on a stretcher are not apparent in this tape at all," said Marcia Clark, the former prosecutor in the O.J. Simpson trial. "He moves freely. He moves fluidly, not like someone who has just been through a beating in any way, shape or form, someone's whose head has been pounded on the pavement as hard as described, someone who's nose was broken and bleeding. That tells you a great deal."

Marcia Clark is a paid performer, and trained as a lawyer.  She would try to present things in a way that conform to people's prejudices, so that they would jump to conclusions.

I don't know why Zimmerman left his truck.  Maybe he got out of his truck to wait for the police officer, and then decided to go look behind the townhouses.

lol

Zimmerman has a history of violent behavior.  Assaulting a police officer and a domestic violence charge among other things.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/30/trayvon-martin-case-george-zimmerman_n_1392591.html?ref=mostpopular

[jimrtex]

Zimmerman has a history of violent behavior.  Assaulting a police officer and a domestic violence charge among other things.

The "police officer" was an ABC agent, and the claim is that Zimmerman, then  21, came up and started talking to his friend, and after a while shoved the officer.

If the officer was making an arrest, he was doing a crap job of controlling the situation.  If he was in uniform, and Zimmerman shoved him, it is pretty amazing that the charges were dropped.

The judge ordered he and his ex-girlfriend to stay away from each other.  They were apparently a couple from 18 to 21.

[Gravis Marketing]

ABC agents are police officers.

[I Can't Get That Sound You Make, Out Of My Head]

Can of worms, but would he have been killed if he was white.

This Zimmerman guy needs to spend a long time in jail.

[jimrtex]

ABC agents are police officers.

Police officers may enforce liquor laws, and ABC agents may have law enforcement powers.

They probably aren't in uniform.