In article ,
says...

On Sun, 26 May 2013 13:30:38 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:47:39 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

Zimmerman may very well have attacked
Martin and Martin defended himself.

====

You have to ask yourself what Zimmerman's motive for attack would be.
He already had the police on the way. He already had Martin under
surveilance. Why would he attack? It doesn't add up.

The good news is that this is going to court soon and all of the
evidence wii be out there - everything that this boating newsgroup
needs to render a verdict. :-)

Personally I think they are both guilty: Zimmerman for using a tad of
bad judgement; and Martin for assaulting Zimmerman's bullet, errr,
nose.

The only wild card in this game is the fact that this was private
property, behind a fence and gate and Zimmerman thought he was an
agent of the HOA. If this was a Wackenhut guy, we would not even be
having this conversation.

Kevin just said Martin was hiding and jumped out on Zimmerman.
Why didn't he just stay hidden if he did not want a confrontation?

I'm sorry, where did Kevin say that and where did Kevin get that
information?

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 26 May 2013 15:20:29 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

I'm sorry, where did I say that? Zimmerman may very well have attacked
Martin and Martin defended himself. What isn't plausible about that
scenerio, since Zimmermans SAID he was going to follow Martin, and
Martin said to his girlfriend that he was being followed, and asked him
why are you following me?

Where is the existence that Zimmerman did anything but follow Martin,
perfectly legal.

The confrontation.

That is particularly true since Zimmerman was acting as the HOA agent
on PRIVATE property and Martin was a stranger.

That doesn't mean that Zimmerman had the right to assault Martin, and
that MAY be the case.

What evidence do you have to make that conclusion?

Martin had no injuries but damage to his fists and the bullet hole.




You might be that stupid but a Florida jury won't be.

Oh, so someone is stupid if they aren't narrow minded and can only think
of one scenario? Got it.

Certainly not the one you propose above.
The more we find out about what a thug, thief, drug runner, gun runner
and all around criminal Martin was, the more this looks like a public
service homicide.
He was going to die face down in a pool of blood, no matter what. It
is unfortunate it wasn't just another thug doing it.

You STILL are in denial. You say these things about Martin's past, but
you completely deny Zimmerman's past!!!!!

Martin's activity was hardly in his PAST. He was dealing drugs and in
possession of at least THREE illegal guns 2 of which he was trying to
sell right before he was shot. (a .22, a .380 and the 40 SW in the
picture).

"Right before he was shot" is PURE BULL****.

A week is pretty much right before he was shot if you are dragging out
7 year old incidents.


Well, no, it's not.



We still have not heard about the disposition of the jewelry
he was caught with. I bet the Miami cops were told by the DA to sit on
all of this. Their case is going to be tough enough without cops
saying they know martin.

AGAIN, you sure like digging up a dead kid's past who can't defend
himself, but you say NOTHING about Zimmerman's very checkered past.
Hmmm...

Nothing Zimmerman did has anything to do with the case. Martin is
starting to emerge as a thug, thief and all around troublemaker.
It goes to Zimmerman's story to 911 that Martin was casing cars. He
may have been looking for more guns to sell or more jewelry to steal.

Oh, ****..... Let's see, EVERYTHING Martin ever done in his life has
everything to do with the case, but nothing Zimmerman done in his life
has anything to do with the case?? You're nuts!


O'mara is collecting all of this because he is looking at the civil
case that will be brought after his client is acquitted in criminal
court. I also believe that is why they have postponed the immunity
hearing. After the acquittal, a judge will have the political cover to
invoke SYG immunity.
In a civil court all of this will come in along with everyone Martin
has beaten up and everyone he has stolen from.

Zimmermans trouble with the cop was 7 years ago, it was finally
determined to be resisting arrest without violence, the restraining
order was not accompanied by any charges, and a speeding ticket.

No, it was NOT "determined" to be without violence. He was allowed to
plead to a lesser charge and that happens in Florida courts every day.
It does by no means mean he wasn't guilty as originally charged.

That allegation from the cop really only implied he TOUCHED the cop.

So, the
restraining order, in your eyes, was granted because he was a great,
upstanding citizen?
There were never any charged placed

Please show what evidence you have that he "only touched the cop".

Also, based on the times and distances Zimmerman
said he covered, Zimmerman would have still been on the phone with
Sanford police when he claims he was attacked by Martin. And if
Zimmerman's retelling of the event were accurate, the confrontation
Zimmerman described with Martin would have occurred much sooner than it
actually did, as well as Zimmerman covered more time and distance after
leaving his truck that night than he revealed to police. THOSE pesky
facts sure make it sound like Zimmerman ran after and attacked Martin!


Cite any of that bull****. The call to the police did not last that
long.
A fat guy like Zimmerman does not look much like a runner. On the
other hand Martin was a football player. Do you really think Zimmerman
could catch Martin if he didn't want to be caught?

Zimmerman's story was he lost sight of Martin and he was heading back
to his truck. Cite one thing in evidence that says that was wrong.

In the first report, despite the cries on the 911 call being deemed
"minimum-to-marginal material for identification purposes", the authors
picked 6 "screams" to analyze. It concludes Martin likely made the first
two screams and Zimmerman the last two screams.

Gee, wonder why Martin screamed first? Perhaps because he was being
attacked???

http://tinyurl.com/og36wzt

On Mon, 27 May 2013 13:00:02 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

It's
easy when the person you sheeple are trying to blame is dead

===

Of course that's often the case in a murder trial...

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 27 May 2013 13:00:02 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

This whole debacle will be over in a few weeks and I doubt you will be
happy. I just wonder how many cities will burn.

Why would I "be happy" one way or the other? I'm not the one claiming
that anyone is guilty or innocent. You and the other FOXites are. It's
easy when the person you sheeple are trying to blame is dead, eh?


You are really out of argument when you invoke the F word.

FYI it really looks like Martin has lost CNN too. They were the ones
who first showed me the cell phone dump.

What on earth are you babbling about "Martin has lost CNN"????

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 27 May 2013 13:00:02 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

It's
easy when the person you sheeple are trying to blame is dead

===

Of course that's often the case in a murder trial...

Actually, lots of murder trials don't have FOX sheeple telling everyone
that the dead person is to blame for being dead.

On Mon, 27 May 2013 14:23:16 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 27 May 2013 13:00:02 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

It's
easy when the person you sheeple are trying to blame is dead

===

Of course that's often the case in a murder trial...

Actually, lots of murder trials don't have FOX sheeple telling everyone
that the dead person is to blame for being dead.

===

Stay tuned, the trial is coming.

On Mon, 27 May 2013 15:24:58 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

the only network that has put
Zimmerman on a pedestal as a saint who had every right to kill a kid
that night. No trial, no nothing

=====

The whole point of the stand your ground law is to allow the right to
defend yourself without the risk of being put on trial and incurring
huge legal expenses. That is exactly what should and would have
happened in this case had not Sharpton and the national media
distorted the facts.

On Monday, 27 May 2013 19:44:01 UTC-3, Eisboch wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------



It's over. Link below:



http://i1319.photobucket.com/albums/t667/Eisboch1/newspaper_zps31d35f1e.jpg


If it was only that easy...I'd like to deal with the criminally insane the same way. ;-)

On Mon, 27 May 2013 18:44:01 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

So, Martin isn't an angle, that doesn't mean by ANY stretch of the
imagination that he attacked Zimmerman first. About FOX, FOX is the
one
who first and foremost, and still is the only network that has put
Zimmerman on a pedestal as a saint who had every right to kill a kid
that night. No trial, no nothing.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

It's over. Link below:

http://i1319.photobucket.com/albums/t667/Eisboch1/newspaper_zps31d35f1e.jpg

=======


Heh, nice job.

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 27 May 2013 15:24:58 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

the only network that has put
Zimmerman on a pedestal as a saint who had every right to kill a kid
that night. No trial, no nothing

=====

The whole point of the stand your ground law is to allow the right to
defend yourself without the risk of being put on trial and incurring
huge legal expenses. That is exactly what should and would have
happened in this case had not Sharpton and the national media
distorted the facts.

If so, then there sure would be a lot of murders gotten away with.
They've already gotten that stupid law out of the way in this case.