Shellie Zimmerman ~ *Doubtful of his Innocence*

it was "only a bloody nose" because Zimmerman had a gun to stop it from being worse. Zimmerman is not compelled to take a brain injury before he is allowed to shoot. A gun is what prevented Zimmerman from being a victim of a vicious assault. Guns aren't the problem, they are the resources used to prevent bad things turning worse for the person who can use the gun legally.

 

Rachel Jeantel is the only person anywhere who made this claim, and she didn't even get her story right. Originally, she said she heard another voice asking, 'what are you doing around here?'. That doesn't sound like Zimmerman jumping him. Lastly, Rachel couldn't even tell in which order things happened. There was noise over the phone, before she claims that Martin asked why Zimmerman was following him. Did Martin jump Zimmerman, and then ask why he was following? Rachel by her own admission, doesn't know. The fact that Rachel choose to conviently leave out important details, until the defense atturney forced to admit her original statement was different, suggests that Rachel could have left out more information. I don't consider her testimoney credible anymore.

If she had stuck with one story, and told the entire thing consistently, then maybe you would have a point. But the moment she got on the stand, and omitted key information, that Zimmerman asked Martin why he was there, disproving the theory Zimmerman jumped Martin, and initiated the assault, she lost her believability. What else did she leave out? We don't know.

The point of the other links, was to prove that you don't know if you'll need help. The prior poster, if you had paid attention, said this:
"In fact, I am pretty sure that I would not put myself in a situation where I would be either beaten or rape"

That is a moronic statement. You don't know when you are going to need help. You don't know when you will need to defend yourself.

Pro-tip for forum conservations, Margot. If you see a response that you don't understand, before responding sarcastically, and making yourself look dumb, check the context. Go and read the post they were responding too. Makes you look smarter when you respond.

 

I thought she was a pretty good witness... and highly credible.

 

We agree to disagree. I've given my reasons. Moving on.

 

Credible witnesses are not always glib and articulate.

 

Her testimony didn't even match up with others who heard Zimmerman yelling for help. Apparently she could hear Martin perfectly, and yet not Zimmerman who was getting his head smashed on the concrete? I don't think so. Not credible.

 

Here let me fix

'Well its hard to have compassion for a grown man that shoots and kills an unarmed teenager who is beating him and threatening him with serious bodily harm or death.'

Why is it hard to have compassion for someone who had to shoot someone to defend themselves? Do you rather have compassion for thugs who assault and threaten people?

 

And he wasn't arrested on those charges was he?

He was not charged with negligence, there was none.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/88953520/George-Zimmerman-Charging-Document



Read it and weep:



Again, just because Zimmerman was found not guilty of murder does not mean that he wasn't negligent.[/QUOTE]

 

Such assaults have been demonstrated to you repeatedly. The testimony at trial supported the fact that Martin could have and did in fact cause the injuries to Zimmerman, none of your fallacious assertions were supported in court.

 

And yet I had to explain the law to you as regard to Florida's statutes covering assaults and stalking which you totally misrepresented so spare us your asserted legal expertise.

- - - Updated - - -

Who blew it with your assertions about the law.

The challenge remains unanswered. Post the Florida statutes, in their entirety and explain how Zimmerman committed and assault and a stalking as you claimed.

 

She should get her money back, she claimed Zimmerman committed an assault and a stalking under Florida law, when I corrected her she still tried to maintain it and has yet to admit she was wrong on both claiming she has more expertise than anyone else here in reading legal statutes therefore that settles it.

 

So why are you still so obsessed with him?

 

Then why do you claim she is lying when she told investigators that Martin told her he was back at the apartment and had lost Zimmerman?

 

And they couldn't be more blatant, and overconfident about it, lol.

 

Lol.... while explaining a whole lot about your arguments and claims.... you are the only person on Earth who thinks that.

Even she admitted she was horrendous.



Best law school in the nation you say?
12th? was the class 11 ?

 

or consistent?

 

Oh wow....... hard to know what to say to this stuff......

So, you'd rather be raped than to defend yourself to the point where you would kill him..... God Almighty.... right. Let the pervert live, so he can move on and rape more women and girls. You really think he'd stop w/you? What you're saying here is you place more value on a pervert and his life than you do your own life and body.

Do you have a daughter, granddaughters?! Do you think they should share your sentiments about not fighting back so hard that they would kill the pervert who's attacking them?

And to say you'd never put yourself in a situation where you'd be beaten or raped. Sadamie, that's just plain stupidity. Women have been attacked by just walking to their car! Even just going to sleep, which is what I did! Something horrible can happen to a woman at any time, any place w/o a hint of warning......

And you think a woman being beaten involves only a bloody nose and a few scratches..... well, I bet the women who ended up w/broken noses, broken bones, brain concussions, broken teeth,, hair ripped out of their head, spiral injuries, etc etc etc wished that had been the case for them.

And no, speaking gentle words of inspiration will not calm a sick, twisted mind that's intent on raping, beating a woman..... sorry, but that's delusional.....

Guns are not the problem - it's the sexual predators and criminals .... but after reading your post here, I don't expect you to understand that....

 

"I wouldn't use a gun to defend myself if I was being raped"

Did I read that right? Wow. I can tell yall in absolute honesty that even though I don't carry a gun all the time anymore. If I DID come across a man, or men, raping a woman and I had a gun on me at the time, I'd kill every man who was trying to rape her if that's what it took to prevent it.

I pray the author of that statement never ever has to put it to the test.

 

What's strange for some... is kinky to others.


The entire post was just lefty, righteous BS.
"If a man was holding me down, sitting on top, punching me MMA style and reaching for my gun... I would just let him"

And what if they were all in a room, at gunpoint, and raped one-by-one... I guess she would just lay there thinking... "eh, we'll recover".

 

Guns are a problem. . .too many people rely on them for "safety," when they only increase their chance to be killed or to kill someone, and more often than not, it is NOT the "bad guys" that are being killed or wounded, but a family member or oneself!

I value LIFE most of all. . .I am well aware of the ugliness in this world and how there are plenty of sick people who will attack or rape someone for no reason but cruelty. I am all heartedly in favor of protecting women (and men) from being beaten and rape. . .especially children. The problem is that it is not always "strangers" who are the perpetrators of those cruelties. . . .in fact, I would suggest that domestic abuse and incest are where the deepest problems reside.

Yet, see what happened to a woman with a known abusive husband who shot a bullet in the air to warn him . . .she got 25 years in jail (case is now going to be reviewed), and the wife beater never even got a scratch!

Guns give a FALSE sense of safety. . .and they KILL. . .

 

(spoiler alert)

I tried clicking your link but it wouldn't let me see it because I'm not a member of: "Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America". Lol...

Which basically explains your whole problem with all this... and how you'd rather be raped than defend yourself.

Owning a gun is not something you need to remain afraid of. Just FYI.

That's a dumb law. But it's the law. Firing a weapon in a domestic dispute is 20 years.
You blaming the gun for this woman going to prison?
If not, what does it have to do with anything ?

So, as you declared, just lay there and let it happen.

Well, luckily for Zimmerman... he has a lot more sense than you.

 

Smoking pot, buying pot, possessing pot, possessing stolen jewelry, assaulting other students and vandalizing school property for starters.

Actually, you don't have that right. Martin had no right to be perceived or not perceived in any particular way in a public space. Martin had no right to not be perceived as suspicious by another citizen. This is just something people made up.

A black teenager doesn't have the right to define law and invent responses to events inconsistent to law. Martin has no legal right to defend himself from a guy who is walking in the opposite direction 30' away.

Respectfully,

 

Funny you should say that! Did you read the transcripts? Trayvon was threatened. . .he stated so much on the phone to his friend, and it is obvious that any teenager (especially a Black teenager who knows the history of abuse and gang related attacks in Florida) being followed by a stranger in the dark, first by car, then on foot WOULD feel threatened!

And, even Zimmerman admit that Trayvon asked him "why are you following me." So. . .why didn't he answer he was a neighborhood watch and asked the kid if he needed assistance finding an address? That would have at the least deescalated the whole situation.

By the way. . .guns bought for protection are shown to be used more often for suicide or to kill/wound a family member or friend than they are in urgent cases of REAL self-defense.

Carry your gun if you must. . .but don't try to pressure those of us who do not feel the need for a false "security blanket" to agree with you.

 

Listen. . .I am 63 years old. . and never had a gun, and never had the need for a gun.

The only time I was attacked (3 times) were by a family member and by a priest. . . when I was under the age of 12.

As I said. .. keep your opinion, as this is a free country, but why is it so important for the gun lovers to convince everyone else of the "necessity" to own a gun for their safety?

Leave it alone. . .enjoy your gun, and I'll enjoy my freedom of mind that allows me to feel safe (safer!) WITHOUT a gun!

 

I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
I've seen your rationale in these posts... I am thankful you don't have a gun.

But I am certainly allowed to point and laugh at the stuff you are typing.