Huh? What the heck did you just say?
Posted on 03/27/2012 5:32:25 AM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
With a single punch, Trayvon Martin decked the neighborhood watch volunteer who eventually shot to death the unarmed 17-year-old, then climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk several times, leaving him bloody and battered, authorities told The Orlando Sentinel.
That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been corroborated by witnesses, authorities said.
(Excerpt) Read more at articles.orlandosentinel.com ...
****A number of freepers have asserted this. None have provided a link to any statement that supports through eyewitness account that Martin attacked Zimmerman. Can you?
2)What picture does the physical evidence paint?
****I assume that you mean the bloodied nose and back of Zimmerman's head with the wet, grass-stained shirt back.
They paint of picture of somebody who got punched in the nose and fell backwards, hitting his head. These bits of information say absolutely nothing about who started the fight or how the two combatants ended up in the same space.
I assume that you're a grown man and that you've been around the block. Have you ever seen a guy start a fight then get his ass kicked? I have, plenty of times.
Fair enough. Perhaps you could provide links to witness statements and physical evidence, such as CCTV, etc., that refutes Zimmerman's version of the events.
There may be a civil suit but who knows how that would go...
Doesn't Florida's Stand Your Ground law specifically prohibits civil suits in cases where no criminal charges have been filed?
What does race have to do with it?
Can you point to eyewitness accounts that refute Zimmerman's version of events?
They paint of picture of somebody who got punched in the nose and fell backwards, hitting his head. These bits of information say absolutely nothing about who started the fight or how the two combatants ended up in the same space.
They also paint a picture of Martin attacking Zimmerman, exactly as the eyewitness statements claim.
I assume that you're a grown man and that you've been around the block. Have you ever seen a guy start a fight then get his ass kicked? I have, plenty of times.
Can we also assume you've read about instances where someone with criminal intent attacks a CCW holder only to get shot and killed in the process? I have. Plenty of times.
There was an utterly horrible column in the Dallas Morning News today written by a gal named J. Floyd. It portrayed the usual leftist line that Zimmerman was an overzealous, cop wannabe.
I let her have a piece of my mind (now I don’t have much left).
As long as we’re guessing here (and that’s all we’re doing at this point—but at least we are making educated guesses)— I’m guessing that Trayvon decided he was being disrespected and turned on the man following him.
Since the man was going back to his truck, Trayvon got the jump on him and was having a nice time doing a little beating on the guy. I doubt if it occurred to him that Zimmerman had a gun.
That J. Floyd woman also was hysterical about the fact that Zimmerman was ‘carrying.’
Most of us would carry in that situation, I know I would.
Can you provide any eyewitness statements or physical evidence that does not support Zimmerman's version of events?
IOW, where's your proof he's lying about what happened that night?
You are correct, there are not wintesses to date who witnessed the start of the fight...but we do have two winteses now about the fight not long after it started and their testimony tends to support and backup Zimmerman’s statement...ie. Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman beating him about the head and slamming his head against the ground.
The physical condition of both Trayvon and Zimmerman also supports Zimmerman’s statement, ie. broken nose, bloody face, lacerations on the back of his head, grass stains, etc.
I do not think there is enough evidence to go after Zimmerman...I believe that he actually did defend himself in the end...and he was clearly loosing the altercation and in the process of being injured. Without clear evidence that all of that was a result of Trayvon defending himself, then there is no evidence to support a prosecution of Zimmerman.
But, as I have said, if the convene a Garnd Jury that will mean the prosecution, for whatever reason believes they have such evidence (or they feel politcally pressured to hold one in any case) and jurors will have to decide if it stands muster to go to trial. If they do not convene the Grand Jury then they do not have the evidence to even start the process.
Thanks for the dialog.
Annnnnd? Come on heartwood, what happened next?
Mormonism? Glad I didn't hang in his commune, my peace mates did LSD..........LOL!
Huh? What the heck did you just say?
Hellfire, that's exactly what got us Obama.
Then damnit fool, post a link to what you are claiming........If you can't do that then you're no better than the other ignorant hangmen around here.
You know darn well folks around here demand "links" and the fact that you neglected to provide any indicates that you are just fabricating false information in order to support your useless argument that Zimmerman should be hanged......
They can be written documents, such as a letter stating something like..."You know I wasn't there...". Such a statement in a letter (or email) is worthless as proof of anything without the person to whom it was addressed acknowledging that it is a true statement. The same is true of un-corroborated statements to LE.
Self-serving statements are any self-exculpatory statements that lack neutral corroborating evidence or eyewitness testimony. Zimmerman's statement to Sanford PD meets this definition.
I provided one of many decisions that are out there to be found.
wtc911, we have nothing to rebut because all the cases you have cited deal with hearsay. An exculpatory statement to law enforcement by a declarant, whether contemporaneous or after Miranda waiver, is not the same as a third-party recitation of another's statement out of court, nor is it the same as a completely non-relevant self-serving statement such as "you know I wasn't there" during a jailhouse telephone call with one's attorney.
You have posted neither caselaw nor Rule that makes exculpatory statements to law enforcment, by a decalarant, inadmissable or of diminished value at trial.
Indeed, under Brady v. Maryland, the prosecution must provide all exculpatory evidence, including statements made to police) to the defense prior to trial. Is this merely so that such evidence can be suppressed at trial?
I think not.
Most people, if they'd like a link, they ask for one. Civilly.
It's in the third paragraph.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/03/19/US-to-investigate-killing-of-Fla-teen/UPI-85941332170292/
I think I'm going to need an interpreter...LOL
You are out of your Frackin mind, where did you get that information????
If Martin had run away then there would have been a gunshot wound to the back, yes?
Unfortunately for your idiotic claim, there is no such wound to the back, instead, there is a George Zimmerman with a busted nose, contusions to the back of his head and grass stains on the back of his sweatshirt and a witness stating on record that he saw Trayvon Martin on top of Mr. Zimmerman, beating on him.........
Holy crap, I think there's a "stupid" virus running rampant thru this site........
What orifice are you pulling this crap out of?
You seem to be claiming that Martin KNEW Z was armed, and then that he had his pistol in hand?
A bit early to hit the bong, isn't it?
Yes, and have you listened to the witness' testimony? I know you have but yet you keep up your useless arguments..........
Actually we do, it was when Martin was on top of him...........the real question is, how close was Martin to Zimmerman's face?
A thought problem: If Martin had not died, would his statements have been admissible without corroboration?
Are you saying that witness cannot be a witness if he was a participant?
Wow. And to think all the trials I have seen called the participants as the main witnesses, many of whom denied any wrongdoing.
Then someone says, “Yes you did, you’re just trying to get out of trouble now.”
Then the witness can introduce the statements to the police made at the time of the incident to rebut the allegation that he is just making it up to get out of it.
If Martin was here, he may say, Zimmerman assaulted me, but would that be a self-serving statement?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.