4 Witnesses Have Changed Their Stories in the Zimmerman Case.

Which is different because he went out to shoot the perps. Zimmerman was just following without the intention of shooting and only did so when his life was threatened.

 

Correction, unarmed attacher.

 

Where is the evidence that proves this?

 

Evidence to prove what? You need evidence to prove that Trayvon was acting suspiciously. There is none so far nor has Zimmerman cited any reason for him suspecting Trayvon. As such, he would be deemed innocent.

You do not need evidence to prove that a citizen walking down the road is not intending to commit a crime. You need evidence to prove that he is intending to commit one.

 

Zimmerman was NEVER told NOT to follow Martin.

 

Any non resident in a gated private community is suspicious considering the number of burglaries in the previous months.

Martin wasn't walking on a public street that was city owned. He was walking in a gated private community where he wasn't a resident. It makes a big difference.

 

Zimmerman claims Martin looked suspicious, he didn't say it was because he was black. Zimmerman was going by his behaviour. That is perfectly understandable. You claim different, why?

 

Let's just ignore all facts, shall we. The NW mandate specifically instructs its members to only observe and report and to NOT follow or confront. Further, the dispatcher also told him NOT to follow Trayvon but to let the cops do their job.

Doesn't make much of a difference. Martin had the same rights. Unless Zimmerman was a licensed and trained security guard on his job, he had no business following or confronting Trayvon.

So whatever Zimmerman says is fact now? Martin was just walking down the street. He was NOT acting suspiciously. For Zimmerman to claim he was, he would have to prove that there was indeed reason to believe that Martin was in the midst of or intending to commit a felony. As yet, there is no evidence to show that Martin had any such intentions.

 

The Dispatcher told him "we don't need you to do that" What part of that don't you understand?

Please post the law or statute saying you can't follow a stranger through your private community neighborhood? Martin was NOT a resident of the private twin lakes community, neither was his Dad.

Walking down a street on PRIVATE not public property. Anyone who isn't a resident of a private gated community is suspicious considering the number of burglaries that had occurred in the preceding months. If it was a city owned public street, you may have a case. But, in this case you don't.

 

No it isn't. I'm just going from the 911 call and how Zimmerman was describing Martin. He even said he looked like he was on drugs or something. I'm really wondering where anyone gets that Zimmerman thought Martin was a criminal only because he was black.

How do you know this for sure? There is only the 911 call from Zimmerman. There is no video yet to show Martin "just walking down the street." How do you know Martin wasn't acting suspiciously?

Zimmerman was calling 911 not conducting a court case. He doesn't need to prove anything to call the police and he doesn't need to show Martin's intentions. If it was Zimmerman's perception Martin was suspicious he has every right to call the police.

 

The real question is what part of that did Z not understand. Z is such a dip (*)(*)(*)(*). He has no one to blame for all this but himself.

 

What part of that means "follow him"?

Trayvon would have the same rights irrespective of whether it was a private or public community.

Does not make a difference unless Zimmerman was a trained and licensed security guard for the community.

 

Listening to the 911 call Zimmerman stopped running and spent about another minute talking to the 911 operator. It seems to me he did stop chasing Martin. I don't get where people are claiming he followed Martin further intentionally. Anyone have any proof I would appreciate it.

 

Your claim was the dispatcher told Zimmerman NOT to follow him, prove it or don't.

A person never has the right to use force against anyone not using force against them first. Second, you do NOT have the same rights on someone else's private property that you have on public property. If that were the case I could feel free to use your swimming pool and you couldn't do a (*)(*)(*)(*) thing about it right?

You can keep saying that all you want, but please post the statutes. Walking down a street on PRIVATE not public property. Anyone who isn't a resident of a private gated community is suspicious considering the number of burglaries that had occurred in the preceding months. If it was a city owned public street, you may have a case. But, in this case you don't.

 

It's pretty obvious to me Mr. Fight Club decided to open a can of whoop ass. Well you simply don't have the right to attack anyone first. The lil jackass had three choices, continue on into his Dad's girlfriends house, hang up on his girlfriend and call 911 or go back and attack Zimmerman Fight Club style. Guess he made the wrong choice.

 

There's a body with a bullet in it. That's murder. Z gets 25 hard ones.

 

I really don't get where people think Zimmerman has to prove anything. Most of the burden of proof is on the State, they are the ones bringing the charges. These charges seem pretty outrageous to me. Sure, what happened was tragic without a doubt but a person is considered innocent until proven guilty. That is why I think Zimmerman's account stands until the State of Florida can prove what they have charged him with.

 

This case isn't that simple.

 

If the body with a bullet in it decided to play MMA Fight Club bad ass, I think he walks.

 

So very true, so very true!

 

So very true, so very true!

 

If that witness is white, I would argue they only claim that Trayvon was on top because they are racist. All the prosecution needs is to dig into their past...

 

Yeah, I barked my knuckles many times. I never managed to hit anyone while doing so either so, sorry but that 'evidence' is a bit of a stretch.

 

It is possible to hit someone without damaging any knuckles. If Trayvon was into streetfighting as the Youtube video seems to suggest he would have plenty of fighting experience.

I think the defense would do just fine with the physical evidence. The State brought the charges the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove their case.

 

I'm not saying it is impossible but I am fairly familiar with that part of Florida and I'd say the odds of the witness turning out to be a part of a hate group is pretty slim. It is possible though.