Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 120

Thread: Was Trayvon Martins Death A Cause For A Civil Suit? And Was It Self Defense?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1

    Was Trayvon Martins Death A Cause For A Civil Suit? And Was It Self Defense?

    I'm sure everyone knows about the Trayvon Martin shooting, and if you don't then you must be living under a rock. George Zimmerman stalked and killed a 17 year old boy in a gated community where the kid was walking back to his father's house where he lived with his fiancée after buying skittles and a Arizona iced tea. Now George Zimmerman claims it was self defense and he got off with the whole self defense claim, and now people, are trying to get a civil suit going because they feel like Trayvon Martin was racially profiled and killed. What do you guys think? I think he was racially profiled and killed and nothing was done about it. There is evidence that George Zimmerman was a trouble maker and he should have done time for his crime. I challenge anyone to refute my statements and give me a good debate on this.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Quanna30 View Post
    I'm sure everyone knows about the Trayvon Martin shooting, and if you don't then you must be living under a rock. George Zimmerman stalked and killed a 17 year old boy in a gated community where the kid was walking back to his father's house where he lived with his fiancée after buying skittles and a Arizona iced tea. Now George Zimmerman claims it was self defense and he got off with the whole self defense claim, and now people, are trying to get a civil suit going because they feel like Trayvon Martin was racially profiled and killed. What do you guys think? I think he was racially profiled and killed and nothing was done about it. There is evidence that George Zimmerman was a trouble maker and he should have done time for his crime. I challenge anyone to refute my statements and give me a good debate on this.
    First it will be necessary for you to present all information related to George Zimmerman being a supposed trouble maker. Second it will be necessary to prove conclusively that George Zimmerman's actions meet the legal definition of stalking. Third it is necessary to explain why the continued mention of skittles and iced tea is of any relevance whatsoever and bears repeating with each new mention of the story. Fourth it will be necessary to explain how a civil suit will be likely to succeed when there is evidence to support the believe that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor and attacked George Zimmerman in an unprovoked manner.
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    12,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    First it will be necessary for you to present all information related to George Zimmerman being a supposed trouble maker. Second it will be necessary to prove conclusively that George Zimmerman's actions meet the legal definition of stalking. Third it is necessary to explain why the continued mention of skittles and iced tea is of any relevance whatsoever and bears repeating with each new mention of the story. Fourth it will be necessary to explain how a civil suit will be likely to succeed when there is evidence to support the believe that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor and attacked George Zimmerman in an unprovoked manner.
    Bravo! And if and when a civil trial does begin, you can bet the defense will be trotting out cell phone photos of Trayvon Martin apparently smoking dope and playing with his gun, etc. Evidently Trayvon was a fledgling juvenile delinquent with a shady past, and his personal physical assault on Zimmerman will be well noted.
    “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” - Robert Jastrow

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    . Fourth it will be necessary to explain how a civil suit will be likely to succeed when there is evidence to support the believe that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor and attacked George Zimmerman in an unprovoked manner.
    I'm not aware of what this evidence is, could you fill me in?
    faith is what you cling to when reason points out the fallacy of what you believe

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by johnson View Post
    I'm not aware of what this evidence is, could you fill me in?
    Like it or not, George Zimmerman is a credible witness to what happened. His story is corroborated with the evidence at the site, every iota of his story in fact. This simply does not happen when someone is lying. His injuries are consistent with him getting the XXXX beat out of him, his story of how Treyvon was behaving is consistent with what we now know about Treyvon. While much if the evidence attesting to the character of Treyvon was not admitted, it is very relevant to what actually happened that night to anyone not constrained by the scrutiny of attorneys. Everything points to George Zimmerman's story being accurate.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    719
    So is the evidence his testimony only or is there an eye witness or video or what exactly?
    faith is what you cling to when reason points out the fallacy of what you believe

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by johnson View Post
    So is the evidence his testimony only or is there an eye witness or video or what exactly?
    First off, if there was no evidence, George Zimmerman is acquitted. The evidence has to prove that he committed the crime.

    The evidence was:

    Zimmerman's statement to the police right after the incident.
    Police photos of his injuries and the scene
    Witness who witnessed the altercation and stated Zimmerman was on bottom being wailed on
    911 Recordings
    Witness who was on the phone with Trayvon during the pursuit

    This evidence was admitted. Evidence not admitted includes things regarding past events in the lives of the two involved. This includes evidence that Trayvons Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea were for making a common drink from codine called "lean." It was well known that Trayvon was drinking this stuff. There was also evidence that Trayvon was in fact a thief.

    Evidence against Zimmerman that was not allowed includes many, many 911 calls over similar incidents. Apparently Zimmerman was a little too anxious to catch a bad guy - but can you really blame him for this?

    Plus you have things to consider based on common sense - like, would Zimmerman really put himself within arm's reach of someone he didn't know, who was bigger than him, knowing that he had a loaded pistol in his pocket? You'd have to be really, really dumb to start a physical confrontation with someone with a loaded gun on you. This also points to the fact that he was jumped, and again, Zimmerman's story makes sense.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    719

    only Zimmerman's story

    So I take it the only evidence that Travon started the fight is the testimony of Zimmerman, as no one else said they saw Travon start the fight.

    If this is the case I don't consider this hard evidence at all. Any cop will tell you there are three sides to every story, the story from the first person interviewed, the story from the second person interviewed, and then the truth which falls somewhere between the two.

    We have only the first story and will never be able to here the second story as the story teller is dead, this makes it hard to understand the real truth which falls between the two.

    I might have been inclined to take Zimmerman at his word had he not been caught lying to the courts about his passports and his money situation. Now this is hard evidence that Zimmerman is a liar.
    faith is what you cling to when reason points out the fallacy of what you believe

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    12,657
    Quote Originally Posted by johnson View Post
    So I take it the only evidence that Travon started the fight is the testimony of Zimmerman, as no one else said they saw Travon start the fight.

    If this is the case I don't consider this hard evidence at all. Any cop will tell you there are three sides to every story, the story from the first person interviewed, the story from the second person interviewed, and then the truth which falls somewhere between the two.

    We have only the first story and will never be able to here the second story as the story teller is dead, this makes it hard to understand the real truth which falls between the two.

    I might have been inclined to take Zimmerman at his word had he not been caught lying to the courts about his passports and his money situation. Now this is hard evidence that Zimmerman is a liar.
    Zimmerman was found innocent based on FACTS.

    You want to know something else? Trayvon could very well be in Hell today for being a thief and a pothead, etc.
    “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” - Robert Jastrow

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by Easyrider View Post
    Zimmerman was found innocent based on FACTS.

    You want to know something else? Trayvon could very well be in Hell today for being a thief and a pothead, etc.
    The fact remains that the other side of the story can never be told because it's story teller was killed. George is a liar and there is no dispute that this is a fact.

    Oh and by the way... way to keep spreading christ's love around. I'm still baffled as to why more folks don't come to christ through you and you positive message of christ's love.
    faith is what you cling to when reason points out the fallacy of what you believe

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by johnson View Post
    The fact remains that the other side of the story can never be told because it's story teller was killed. George is a liar and there is no dispute that this is a fact.
    The fact remains that the only facts are what has been presented by George Zimmerman. His story is the full story on the matter because they cannot be disputed by the other party due to the fact Trayvon Martin made the decision to engage in a violent confrontation when he could have simply walked away and left George Zimmerman alone. By choosing to engage in a confrontation when it was not absolutely necessary he chose to forfeit his ability to protest events as reported and give his account of what happened.
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    The fact remains that the only facts are what has been presented by George Zimmerman. His story is the full story on the matter because they cannot be disputed by the other party due to the fact Trayvon Martin made the decision to engage in a violent confrontation when he could have simply walked away and left George Zimmerman alone. By choosing to engage in a confrontation when it was not absolutely necessary he chose to forfeit his ability to protest events as reported and give his account of what happened.
    Again this is speculation. George has proven the fact that he is a liar. Why anyone would believe anything he says is baffling.

    The fact remains the other side of the story can't be told because the story teller is dead. And this common sense will tell you is the reason we don't have all the facts... just the word of a known liar!
    faith is what you cling to when reason points out the fallacy of what you believe

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    679
    Quote Originally Posted by johnson View Post
    Again this is speculation. George has proven the fact that he is a liar. Why anyone would believe anything he says is baffling.

    The fact remains the other side of the story can't be told because the story teller is dead. And this common sense will tell you is the reason we don't have all the facts... just the word of a known liar!
    Your basis for calling Zimmerman a known liar is the fact he told the court really bad, stupid lies that were irrelevant to the case - the sort a child would expect to get away with. If anything, the fact that he has shown himself to be so bad at lying in an outside arena is testament to the fact that he probably could not concoct the sort of story that he stands by - one that both got him acquitted and corroborated every iota of witness testimony and evidence at the scene. His story never changed from day one and he never stumbled a bit when telling it. It is very, very difficult to do this unless your story is indeed true. I never said Zimmerman was even a reasonably smart person, let alone a mastermind capable of pulling off murder under such scrutiny.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    719
    [QUOTE=Databed;476480] - and corroborated every iota of witness testimony and evidence at the scene. /QUOTE]

    And again I'll ask is there any evidence that Travon started the fight besides George's testimony. So far you nor any one else has produced it.

    I'm no criminal but I do understand a thing or two about lying.

    1st. stay as close to the truth as possible.

    2nd. never change the story no matter what.

    3rd. lie only about instances that will show you as responsible for the mishap.

    So as George has shown himself to be a liar (like a child I believe you indicated) it would in no way be unreasonable to think he lied about who started the fight (even children know to lie about this). You may think George is not that smart but I believe he is, and I believe that he full well knew that if he said he started the fight he would be in very big trouble. It is a very simple lie and necessary if the truth is otherwise. As many times as George has been in trouble in the past I'm sure he too is very aware of the above three rules for lying.

    Whit all this said please allow me to state that I in no way am prepared to say this is without a doubt the way it happened... However given the fact that he is a liar, we (and that would include you and anyone else who agrees with you) cannot and IMO should not take this man's word as fact or truth.

    As a side note.. be it small and child like or not, I myself would never lie to a judge about anything... ever!
    faith is what you cling to when reason points out the fallacy of what you believe

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by johnson View Post
    So as George has shown himself to be a liar (like a child I believe you indicated) it would in no way be unreasonable to think he lied about who started the fight (even children know to lie about this). You may think George is not that smart but I believe he is, and I believe that he full well knew that if he said he started the fight he would be in very big trouble. It is a very simple lie and necessary if the truth is otherwise.
    Why would George Zimmerman lie about matters unrelated to the events that occurred the night of the incident but not matters directly related to the events that occurred on the night of the incident?

    As many times as George has been in trouble in the past I'm sure he too is very aware of the above three rules for lying.
    As far as the justice system is concerned George Zimmerman possesses no criminal record and committed no crimes in the past. The matters pertaining to assaulting an officer were dropped due to the bogus nature of the charges. They are of no relevance and there is no reason to continue repeating them as they are non-events.
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •