Here is a FACT that you choose to ignore....not at one point have I defended Zimmerman. I have only pointed out that YOU DO NOT know all the details of this case... THAT IS AN INDISPUTABLE FACT. I do not know all the details either.
Does it really make a difference what the lead detective said ? The words he spoke were his opinion. He may well be right but he could be wrong, IDK.
Yep. the DA's not prosecuting the case before ALL details and FACTS are known is another story. And yes, I need much more than an investigators knee jerk reactions and speculations before I call Zimmerman a liar. Do you know the "lead investigator" has had two trial acquittals due to faulty investigations?
You may be right that the FBIs ballistic and trajectory will prove Trayvon was murdered, but so far that hasn't happened. I actually doubt that those tests will prove murder but they will show approximately how close they were at the time of the shooting, a point that as far as I know is not in question.
Really, you think the FACTS are out??? That must be because your handlers have told you these are the facts, even though there are other facts that don't fit YOUR facts.
YOUR facts:
(1)FACT, a phoney 911 call was placed.
(2)FACT, zimmerman exaggerates the call to increase the urgency
(3)FACT, zimmerman tells police Trayvon is on Drugs without proof.
(4)FACT, zimmerman makes a racial slur while on the phone referring to Trayvon as a "coon"
(5)FACT, zimmerman chases Trayvon and when told TWICE to stop, he continues anyways armed with a semi automatic pistol.
(6)FACT, zimmerman engages Trayvon and a fight breaks out, zimmerman at some point shoots the kid.
(1) How is this a phoney 911 call? Zimmerman as part of a neighborhood watch saw what he deemed to be a suspicious person dressed in a hoodie (in Florida on a warm night), walking around and stopping to look around.
(2)What were Zimmerman's exaggerations? Exactly what part is exaggerated?
(3)In the part of the 911 call that I heard on ABC news, Zimmerman did not say anyone was on drugs. I did hear him say the person was acting strangely ( a point of opinion) and was POSSIBLY on drugs. So you are twisting the truth here....AKA lying.
(4) I personally have not heard this part of the 911 tape so I can give no opinion on what it sounds like. I have read somewhere that that part was misunderstood and meant something else. I also know nothing of the street language used in that area.
(5) From all that I have heard (again on ABC news) Zimmerman followed (not chased) Trayvon and when turning around to retreat, Trayvon rushed him. I do not know what is the truth here, and NEITHER DO YOU.
(6) according to witness accounts, it was Trayvon that engaged Zimmerman. Again, I was not there and did not see what happened. AND NEITHER WERE YOU. and THAT is a FACT.
What more do I need to know? Since you nor I do not know anything other than what we have read or heard from the media, I will reserve the right to NOT judge someone guilty when I do not have indisputable facts.
What YOU can not escape is that the "sworn affidavit" by the lead investigator was his opinion based on a single interview from someone who had just been involved in a shooting that lead to someone's death. I guess you think this lead detective in the one and only honest person in that county and is always 100% correct in his assessment.
Oh and BTW, above when I said "Do you know the "lead investigator" has had two trial acquittals due to faulty investigations?", that is a complete fabrication of the truth. I only said that to show that you are not the only one that can make **** up.
ALL THIS is a lot of YADDA YADDA YADDA. Nothing but pure spoon fed mis information. ON this very thread, I posted the actual 911 call that zimmerman made. All you have to do is listen to it. Some portions were redacted by the owner of the video, like addresses and the friend-ing coon part. The rest of the audio is 100% accurate.
Why do you continue to enter a discussion if you are not willing to examine all the facts? Why do you rely on having to be "told" what to think, because at the end of the day, thats what your telling us. You seem to want us to accept that you dont hav the wherewithall to form your own opinion and need to have "some" news channel give it to you.
As to the audio, its clear zimmerman intended on making something out of nothing. You seem OK with him making an assessment that Trayvon was suspicious just because he was black. You seem ok with zimmerman claiming he was suspicious because he was looking around. My question to you is simple: "Where is it illegal to be black and looking around?"
Zimemrman makes NO CLAIM that this kid did anything wrong, no car vandalism, no attempted break ins, no tagging, no littering, all he does is claim the kid is standing there looking around, but really TRP, its a residential neighborhood, what he suppose to look at? Is he suppose to walk staring at the sky in order to avoid suspicion? Do all persons standing on a residential street who are looking around become suspicious and deserve to have 911 called on them?
You say he didnt exaggerate the call, yet, you havent listened to it. How does that figure? How do you reconcile anything on the audio if you dont bother to listen to every word?
How many times does this have to be explained in order for you to get it? Why are you so dead set on defending the shooter?
On the audio, he tells the dispatcher that "the guy is black", "the guy is on drugs" ( not maybe on drugs, or possibly on drugs, or acting like hes on drugs) BUT "ON DRUGS". Zimmerman has no training whatsoever in drug behavior.
Second issue I have with you, is despite providing you on this very thread with the FACTS that Zimmerman was NOT A PART of ANY organized neighborhood watch, YOU continue to associate zimmerman with one.
""
Zimmerman as part of a neighborhood watch saw what he deemed to be a suspicious person ""
Really? This is simply not true. He was a SELF APPOINTED vigilante driving around his neighborhood with a gun in his wasteband looking for trouble. According to the sheriff of florida, Zimmerman BROKE every single rule for a neighborhood watch person and would be kicked out of the neighborhood watch for doing what he did.
Zimmerman had no TRAINING that gave him the ability to determine that ANY PERSON was suspicious. Next you said "
in Florida on a warm night""....wrong again. IT WAS A RAINY NIGHT and since when is wearing a HOODIE in the rain a part of suspicious clothing? Are you really this dense?
You also say there are witnesses who say this or that, but this is not true either. In all the reports taken by the police, there are no such reports that back up what you claim or what fox news claims. The witneses are AFTER THE FACT witnesses.
I do not dispute that zimmerman and Trayvon at some point got into a fight, but what has to be established is how that fight started and was trayvon fighting for his life. How you put Trayvon in the aggressors role is beyond comprehension. How you disregard the fact that zimmerman was told twice to avoid contact and did so anyway only to end up in a fight and then shooting the boy.
Somehow, zimmerman fires TWO shots. One of those shots hits the boy in the chest. No matter what the boy did, IT WAS NOT EQUAL FORCE. Zimmerman was probably getting his ash kicked and then became afraid after starting the fight and took out his gun and killed the kid.
As to the lead detective, how do you discount his trained professional opinion? You want to set aside the professional opinion of person trained to examine homocide scenes, yet accept an untrained self proclaimed neighborhood watchmens opinion on suspicious persons? Are you really this freakin serious?
You say the lead detective only provided his opinion, well, my friend, that detective spoke to all witnesses that night and subsequently and made his determination based on factors including zimmermans changing of his story TWICE.
You cant escape these words "ZIMMERMANS STORY JUST DOESNT ADD UP".
Of course it adds up for you and I believe its because the victim was black. Sorry, its the only thing your words point to.
Peace
TOS
