[Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory

Mon Aug 26 16:53:40 PDT 2013

Just a couple of rebuttal points and then 'nuff said by me on this thread.

John Good was an eyewitness called by the PROSECUTION and he testified 
that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and beating him as Zimmerman was 
lying on the ground.

If Saundra is truly 
saying 'that there is room for doubt and interpretation', then that 
hampers the prosecution and plays right into the hands of the defense.  
She also goes on to say that there is something wrong with Florida 
laws.  I agree with her on that one.  I don't think Zimmerman 
should have gotten off Scott Free and he should have some black mark on 
his 
record.

I don't disagree that Martin was provoked.  He knew he 
was being followed by a 'crazy ass cracker'.  The only injuries cited on
 Martin's autopsy report were the gunshot and a
 small abrasion on his left ring finger below the knuckle.  At issue is 
that once the two of them had been fighting for some time (45 seconds 
minimum since that's the only duration that can be firmly established) 
during which George Zimmerman is being beating (according to the 
prosecution witness and Zimmerman's injuries) and yelling 'Help! Help!' 
(according to two 911 calls and the prosecution witness) before he fires
 his gun, is it reasonable to conclude he was acting in self defense?  

-Scott

Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 16:00:45 -0700
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory
From: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
To: scooterd408 at hotmail.com

The witnesses (plural) did not say anything definitively; nothing. All of their comments were qualified: "I think ..." etc. No one KNOWS what happened other than Zimmerman. Some folks choose to believe Zimmerman and some don't. There is room for doubt and interpretation -- and that is all that Sandra was saying.

Besides, suppose you follow someone for a length of time, first in a car then on foot. You get in shouting match with the person and it escalates into a fight. You think you then have the right to kill him in "self-defense"? That sounds wrong to me. Calling it "self-defense" sounds wrong since stalking someone is a kind of provocation. (I know that you accept some of this Scott; I generally agree with your take on the issue -- just not all of it.)

Lastly, we never saw pictures of Martin's face, did we? Hard to say who was beating on whom -- which again was the main point that Saundra was trying to make. Nothing cut and dry about this case at all.

On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:

BTW, regarding your statement:

'Further, having had the most unfortunate experience of having had to literally fight for my life,
 neither Zimmerman’s nor Trayvon’s injuries are consistent with your 
interpretation of Trayvon beating Zimmerman for “at least 45 seconds.”  
They just aren’t, and that’s something that’s pretty indisputable, pure 
and simple.'

I can't establish a timeline of 45 seconds 
based on Zimmerman's bloody, swollen, broken nose, and cuts to the back 
of his head.  I'm basing the 45 seconds on the start of the first 911 
disturbance cal, through all the screams of 'help', and up to the 
recorded gunshot on the call.  The 45 seconds of the beating of 
Zimmerman by Martin is what is recorded in that the call and assumes 
that the call was placed and connected IMMEDIATELY with 911 operator at 
the very start of the disturbance.   If you want to extend the beating 
by several more seconds due to the lag of the caller realizing that 
there was in fact a disturbance, a lag for her to get to a phone, a lag 
for her to dial it, a lag for the call to connect, and then a lag for 
the 911 operator to answer, then I think that's reasonable, but not 
measurable, so we're stuck with the 45 seconds at the start of the call being picked up,
 through the screams of help, up to the gunshot.  And the only eyewitness 
testified that Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating.  The eyewitness 
claims that Zimmerman was yelling 'Help! Help!'  The eyewitness claims 
to have yelled to Martin to 'stop' and that he was 'calling 911'.  The police are on the scene within 2 minutes of the shooting, handcuff Zimmerman, photograph Zimmerman with a bloody nose, take him down to the station, and photograph him again with cuts on the back of his head.

If
 you want to say that Zimmerman's injuries are too minor for him to have
 been beaten on for 45 seconds, I can't dispute that because I can't determine a timeline bases on those injuries.  If Zimmerman were
 lying on the ground in a completely defenseless position with Martin 
reigning blows on his face, I'd expect more damage.  But I don't have 
any information if Zimmerman was defenseless or if he was trying to 
block any of Martin's blows.  I'm not going by extent of injuries, I'm only going by the 911 timestamping 
which records screams for 'help' and 45 seconds later records a 
gunshot.  That coupled with Zimmerman's injuries (bloody nose, cuts), 
eyewitness testimony, and the fact that the shot was fired at very close
 range pretty much destroys any theory that Zimmerman was in a 3 point 
stance taking aim at Martin's kill zone.

The defense had a relatively easy task displaying 'reasonable doubt'.

From: scooterd408 at hotmail.com

To: v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 15:38:02 -0600
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com

Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory

The irrefutable timeline, evidence, and witness testimony I was referring to was:
Zimmerman hangs up on a recorded / timestamped phone call after talking with the police dispatcher for more than 4 minutes.
2.5 minutes later, a recorded / timestamped 911 call is made reporting a disturbance with screams of 'help' in the background.30
 seconds later another recorded / timestamped 911 call is made reporting
 reporting a disturbance with screams in the background.14 seconds later (and 45 seconds after the first 911 disturbance call), a gunshot is recorded / timestamped.2 minutes after the gunshot police arrive on the scene.
Zimmerman has a bloody, swollen, broken nose and cuts on the back of his head.  Martin has been shot dead at very close range.
The
 only eyewitness of the account (not including Zimmerman) is that Martin
 was on top of Zimmerman punching him while Zimmerman is call for help.

Note
 that I don't even mention George Zimmerman's statement in the above.  
The least unreliable of the above is the eyewitness testimony, so throw 
that out if you wish.  You still have 911 calls recording & 
timestamping calls for help, a delay, a gunshot, and then police 
arriving 2 minutes later finding a bloodied George Zimmerman smacked in 
the nose and head and a dead Trayvon Martin.  Concoct your own story if 
you wish, but if you want to convince a jury, you'd best have compelling
 evidence to back it up.  And as for 'compelling DNA' evidence.  What's 
compelling about it?  That this counters George Zimmerman's statement 
that Martin's hand was on the gun and holster?  This was was yet another
 lie in a long string of lies from George Zimmerman because he's a lying
 lyer and he's only full of lies.  So why believe anything he says?  Why
 even believe that he was 'reaching' for something'???:

'Truth' - he was 'reaching'.  This is clearly established by Zimmerman's unreliable admission.'Lie' - he was reaching for his phone.
'Truth' - he was reaching for his gun although there is no supporting evidence of this.'Truth' - alternately he had already drawn his weapon although there is no supporting evidence for this.
Possible Credible Truth - Martin tackled Zimmerman causing all of his injuries in one fell swoop.
'Truth' - Zimmerman yelled for 'help' for at least 45 seconds while Martin just looked at his watch.
'Truth'
 - Zimmerman having already drawn his weapon before being tackled waited
 around for 45 seconds for the cobwebs to clear out of his head after 
being tackle and then calmly placed his gun (which he had somehow 
managed to hold on to after being tackled) in the chest of Martin while 
Martin just continued looking at his watch.Undeniable Truth - Zimmerman pulled the trigger.

Which
 version do you think the jury is going to believe?  The one that is 
backed by recorded / timestamped 911 calls & evidence corroborated 
by eyewitness testimony?  Or the one that is full of speculation and has
 absolutely zero evidence and witness testimony backing it?  If you can 
refute anything whatsoever in the topmost story, have at it.  Keep in 
mind that the 911 calls are recorded and timestamped as I've already 
mentioned a number of times.  But if you don't find 911 calls to be 
reliable, then that defense strategy completely falls apart.  And 
admittedly, I'm putting a lot of weight on the 911 so-called 'evidence'.

-Scott

From: v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm

To: scooterd408 at hotmail.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory

Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 11:53:31 -0700

In part, Scott wrote:
“Based
 on photographic evidence, audio evidence, the measurable timeline, GZ's
 medical report, TM's autopsy report combined with corroborating witness
 testimony, it's difficult to draw any conclusion other than TM being on
 top of GZ and hitting him for at least 45 seconds prior to the fatal 
and only shot.”

Here’s the thing, Scott:  it really isn’t difficult to draw a conclusion different than what you think.  Some people smarter than you & I agree with your interpretation, but some people smarter than you & I don’t agree with your interpretation.  For instance, I found the DNA evidence to be pretty compelling, and it absolutely did not
 support Zimmerman’s little one-sided tale.  You apparently think 
differently, or perhaps gave greater weight to other things I found less
 compelling.

I
 don’t know what “measurable timeline” you like, but the timeline I’m 
aware of absolutely supports that fact that an armed Zimmerman stalked 
Trayvon, and that Trayvon attempted to escape his stalker, unfortunately
 unsuccessfully, on at least one occasion.  Actually, I think it 
accurate to say he aggressively tracked and hunted Trayvon, but I’m 
content to call it stalking.

My
 interpretation of the evidence is that when Trayvon was unable to lose 
his stalker, he verbally confronted Zimmerman, who in his own statement 
admits that he (Zimmerman) started reaching for something.  Zimmerman 
“claims” he was reaching for the cell phone in his pocket, which I find 
to be utter rot & just another of his many lies  – he was going for 
his firearm.  Regardless of whether Zimmerman was reaching for his cell 
phone or his firearm, anyone with connected brain cells – particularly 
after having been stalked for several minutes and having tried 
unsuccessfully to escape the stalker – would reasonably assume that 
Zimmerman was going for a gun.  (Actually, for all you or I know, 
Zimmerman had already drawn down on Trayvon at that point.)  Besides, 
isn’t that the reaction all the gun nuts want us to have?  That’s the 
mindset they think will make society safer:  “Don’t mess with me because
 for all you know, I’m packing heat & I’ll shoot you dead.”  It 
would be funny if it weren’t so tragic.

Anyway, unable to outrun a bullet, Trayvon took the only option
 available to him, and that was to make a running tackle at the goon 
with the gun before he could fire.  And, Zimmerman was as lame in the 
confrontation he initiated as he’s been in life:  Trayvon tackles 
Zimmerman before Zimmerman can get off a shot.  Having watched my share 
of football in my younger years, I have no problem seeing how 
Zimmerman’s head hit the concrete & bounced, and his nose got 
broken, from that one tackle.  The physical evidence actually supports 
that scenario and the physical injuries sure don’t support Zimmerman’s tale of woe.

Further, having had the most unfortunate experience of having had to literally fight for my life,
 neither Zimmerman’s nor Trayvon’s injuries are consistent with your 
interpretation of Trayvon beating Zimmerman for “at least 45 seconds.”  
They just aren’t, and that’s something that’s pretty indisputable, pure 
and simple.

I
 could go on & on & on, but I think I’ve made my point.  
Reasonable and intelligent people have absolutely no difficulty drawing a
 conclusion different than the one you’ve chosen to draw, and to argue 
otherwise is really stupid and arrogant, not to mention intellectually 
dishonest by ignoring the wealth of evidence that contradicts your 
interpretation.  It’s really not difficult at all to disagree with your 
interpretation, and there’s just as much credible support for my 
interpretation as there is for yours.

Now, all of that said, I’m not
 saying that Zimmerman “should” have been convicted of the crimes he was
 charged with.  I wasn’t on the jury, and I have no reason to believe 
the jury didn’t perform its task to the best of its ability, something I
 believe I’ve gone on record as saying.  I absolutely do believe 
there’s something wrong with the laws in Florida when there is no 
criminal penalty for a pathetic pistol-packing wannabe cop who stalks 
& outright kills an innocent kid who was doing nothing wrong, but 
that’s a different matter.  I don’t think the police handled the initial
 investigation adequately, and I don’t think the prosecuting attorneys 
earned their paychecks, but those, too, are different matters.

One
 other point I want to make – a couple of questions, really, for those 
so invested in defending Zimmerman’s actions and blaming the victim.  What
 would your reaction have been had Zimmerman been similarly stalking a 
17-year-old white girl on a dark & rainy night, a stalker she tried 
to lose but couldn’t?  Would you be “blaming” her -- the way you’re 
blaming a black boy -- for verbally confronting her stalker and trying 
to physically defend herself from the goblin with the gun?

Inquiring minds want to know, and we want to know you’re thinking behind your answers.

One
 thing I know for sure:  should Zimmerman -- or someone like him move 
into my neighborhood -- I’m leaving, and I’m fortunate to have the 
resources to do so.  He has proven himself to be nothing more than an 
aggressive, unbalanced, dishonest, deadly loose cannon with inexcusably 
bad impulse control and judgment who should never again be allowed to 
have a firearm.  He wasn’t criminally convicted, but I’m absolutely not 
going to give him a free pass for unjustly killing a kid, nor do I want 
any of my loved ones around such a whack job.  Ever.

Saundra
Moscow, ID

Act as if what you do makes a difference.

~ William James

From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Scott Dredge

Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 2:54 PM
To: Sunil; Paul Rumelhart; Joe Campbell
Cc: viz
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory

Based
 on photographic evidence, audio evidence, the measurable timeline, GZ's
 medical report, TM's autopsy report combined with corroborating witness
 testimony, it's difficult to draw any conclusion other than TM being on
 top of GZ and hitting him for at least 45 seconds prior to the fatal 
and only shot.  GZ shouldn't have followed TM and should have stayed in 
his truck.  TM shouldn't have attacked him.  But TM did what he did and 
GZ did what he did, so here we are.

This whole thing has already 
spun as a 'perfect storm'.  And if GZ is going to do things like tour a 
Kel Tec factory, pose for photo ops, and let it be known he's interested
 in acquiring more fire power, he's putting himself, his family, and 
anyone around him in danger.  His actions are tantamount to 'bring it 
on' taunting.  Don't be surprised if someone takes the bait resulting in
 more tragedy.  Don't be surprised if GZ blasts someone innocent that he
 mistakenly believes was coming after him.  Don't be surprised when 
there is another dead body and GZ claims 'self defense'.

From: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
To: godshatter at yahoo.com; philosopher.joe at gmail.com

Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 13:11:03 -0700
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory
He
 wasn't 'going out to call the police on criminal activity.' He could 
have called them from his home and stayed there. Why do you even saying 
that? 

He was out and about because he wanted to play the cop, 
and he had a gun. He could have stayed home with his gun, like he was 
told to do. 

You keep assuming his defense theory is true. It was effective, it led to the verdict, but that doesn't make it true.

Sunil

Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 11:55:13 -0700
From: godshatter at yahoo.com
To: philosopher.joe at gmail.com

CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory
Do
 you think that neighborhood watch programs are a bad thing?  If you can
 posit for a moment that guns can come in handy for self-defense, then 
going out to call the police on criminal activity might be a time when 
you have a better chance of needing to protect yourself than when you 
are, say, just going to get groceries. If
 you think it wasn't self-defense, then why was Zimmerman doing his best
 to lead the cops to the encounter?  Why were there no injuries on 
Martin consistent with an initial attack by Zimmerman?  Do you think he 
shot him first?  Then why did witnesses see them on the ground 
fighting?  To me, it just doesn't add up.

Paul

From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>

To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
Cc: Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>; viz <vision2020 at moscow.com> 

Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory 
"...
 he thought he was going to die and defended himself." First, the only 
evidence you have for this is that Zimmerman said it was so. There were 
no witnesses to corroborate this. We don't know what happened. My 
interpretation of the results of the trial is that there was no reason 
to disbelieve Zimmerman, so no reason to find him guilty. That does not 
mean that we should believe him. There is no reason to believe him 
either. The fact is we don't know what happened in those moments prior 
to the shooting.

Second, Zimmerman was out looking for 
"criminals" like some want-a-be cop, stalked a suspected criminal who 
turned out to be a boy, called to report it and was advised to stop but 
didn't do so, got out of his car to follow the "suspect," then 
(supposedly) shot the boy because he feared for his life. 

I'm 
sorry but if you are not a cop and you leave your house with a gun 
pretending to "protect" your neighborhood, my sympathy level will drop 
dramatically should something go wrong. Zimmerman's
 actions do not sound like self-defense to me. I am not warped by the 
mainstream media. In fact, I think this is just another example of how 
fear and guns together are more likely to lead to a bad outcome than a 
good one. Incidents like this are precisely why we need gun control. 
Some people are just not smart enough to know how to use guns with the 
required safety and care. The Zimmerman case proves that. And
 saying that folks are dupes just because they happen to share some of 
the views of the mainstream media is no different from saying that you 
are a racist just because you happen to share some of the views of 
racists. On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

I'm
 not supporting Zimmerman.  I'm just dismayed by the attitudes people 
have towards him based on nothing but wishful thinking, as far as I can 
see.  These attitudes are shared across the country, and is making life 
for this man dangerous.  All because he thought he was going to die and 
defended himself. His bad luck that he did so at a time when guns are 
the new boogieman, and that his attacker didn't have the common sense to
 be a white male.

It's really how quickly and absolutely this 
narrative I keep talking about solidified that scares the ever-living 
crap out of me.  It means the main stream media is still king, and that 
your average American still just soaks it right up apparently 
uncritically.

Oh, and I don't plan to shut up, thank you anyway.

Paul

On 08/25/2013 08:39 AM, Joe Campbell wrote:Of
 course I don't condone the bounty, or death threats. It is still a 
mystery to me why you keep condoning Zimmerman. If you want folks to 
stop talking about him, why don't you start us off? Really, I only post 
on that guy when you or others try to defend him, or act shocked about 
the public outrage. Otherwise, I don't really think about him much. On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 8:30 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

You're
 right.  He should look properly chastened at all times so as not to 
offend people like yourself.  I bet he was laughing at a joke!  The 
bastard.

I will admit that if he was thinking in terms of PR, 
then staging a photoshoot at a gun store was not the brightest move.  I 
suspect, though, that he can't move three feet in public without some 
self-righteous a-hole tracking his every move and taking his picture.  
It won't last long, though.  They'll get him in civil court soon where 
the threshold for evidence is not so high.

While we're on the 
subject, does anyone out there in viz-land condone the bounty put on him
 by the New Black Panther Party?  Does anyone condemn it?  How about the
 multiple death threats he and his family have been getting?  I normally
 wouldn't ask this, but the reactions here to this case have so 
disappointed me that I just have to.

Paul 

On 08/24/2013 10:16 PM, Scott Dredge wrote:
I
 think it's STUPID of Zimmerman to be cheesing it up for photos while 
touring a gun factory.  I was seeing shades that idiot president of CA 
fish and game who bagged a mountain lion in Idaho and went on the cover 
of some magazine beaming while holding the dead carcass.

FWIW - I
 disagree that Zimmerman was hunting Martin, but nonetheless he did 
fatally shoot him and this type of behavior is quite the opposite of 
being remorseful.  But hey, if he wants to stay around Florida and make 
himself visible while there's a bounty on his head, that's certainly his
 choice and likely another bad choice in a growing list.
CC: scooterd408 at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
From: philosopher.joe at gmail.com

Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 18:30:05 -0700
To: godshatter at yahoo.com
I
 said it was closer to hunting than self defense. It was. And Martin was
 a kid; Zimmerman was not. And Martin is dead. Maybe that is why no one 
is blaming him.  Did
 Martin make a mistake? Apparently -- but really we don't know that any 
more than we know why Zimmerman did what he did. But Martin paid a hefty
 price for his mistake. Zimmerman did not. That's why folks are upset.
On Aug 24, 2013, at 6:20 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

That's
 the narrative I'm talking about.  It completely ignores Trayvon 
Martin's own actions that helped lead to his death and it exaggerates 
George Zimmerman's actions.  Following someone down a sidewalk is not 
the same as "hunting" a person.  We have exactly zero evidence that 
Zimmerman followed Martin in order to kill him.  

But have fun with the narrative.  If you happen across Zimmerman, get in a few licks for the rest of us.

Paul 

On 08/24/2013 05:44 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:
Goes against the narrative? The guy stalked a kid, against the advice of a 911 operator, and ended up killing him. 
 Honestly,
 I just don't get it. Stalking and shooting is a lot closer to hunting 
than self-defense. Why is that so difficult for you to see?
On Aug 24, 2013, at 5:11 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

Well, he and his family do get death threats regularly: http://globalgrind.com/2013/08/03/robert-zimmerman-reveals-family-400-death-threats-per-minute-starbucks-employee-george-trayvon-martin-details/

And there is a $10,000 bounty put on Zimmerman for his capture by the New Black Panther Party: http://www.upi.com/blog/2013/07/19/Black-Panthers-2012-video-for-Zimmerman-bounty-resurfaces/3711374236844/

So maybe he is in need of a good home-defense weapon.

Of
 course, progressives are not allowed to feel bad about that because it 
goes against the narrative.  Pity, one could almost feel bad for a guy 
who is reviled on the national stage for protecting himself from getting
 his ass beat, whether or not it was his own stupidity that got him 
there.  

Oh, well.  It's much easier to think of him as a monster.  

Paul

On 08/24/2013 03:29 PM, Scott Dredge wrote:http://www.mediaite.com/online/george-zimmerman-went-gun-shopping-today/

======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com=======================================================
 =======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,

serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
              http://www.fsr.net
         mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com

======================================================= 

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the 
communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

From: scooterd408 at hotmail.com

To: v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 15:38:02 -0600
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com

Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory

The irrefutable timeline, evidence, and witness testimony I was referring to was:
Zimmerman hangs up on a recorded / timestamped phone call after talking with the police dispatcher for more than 4 minutes.
2.5 minutes later, a recorded / timestamped 911 call is made reporting a disturbance with screams of 'help' in the background.30 seconds later another recorded / timestamped 911 call is made reporting reporting a disturbance with screams in the background.
14 seconds later (and 45 seconds after the first 911 disturbance call), a gunshot is recorded / timestamped.2 minutes after the gunshot police arrive on the scene.Zimmerman has a bloody, swollen, broken nose and cuts on the back of his head.  Martin has been shot dead at very close range.

The only eyewitness of the account (not including Zimmerman) is that Martin was on top of Zimmerman punching him while Zimmerman is call for help.

Note that I don't even mention George Zimmerman's statement in the above.  The least unreliable of the above is the eyewitness testimony, so throw that out if you wish.  You still have 911 calls recording & timestamping calls for help, a delay, a gunshot, and then police arriving 2 minutes later finding a bloodied George Zimmerman smacked in the nose and head and a dead Trayvon Martin.  Concoct your own story if you wish, but if you want to convince a jury, you'd best have compelling evidence to back it up.  And as for 'compelling DNA' evidence.  What's compelling about it?  That this counters George Zimmerman's statement that Martin's hand was on the gun and holster?  This was was yet another lie in a long string of lies from George Zimmerman because he's a lying lyer and he's only full of lies.  So why believe anything he says?  Why even believe that he was 'reaching' for something'???:

'Truth' - he was 'reaching'.  This is clearly established by Zimmerman's unreliable admission.'Lie' - he was reaching for his phone.'Truth' - he was reaching for his gun although there is no supporting evidence of this.
'Truth' - alternately he had already drawn his weapon although there is no supporting evidence for this.Possible Credible Truth - Martin tackled Zimmerman causing all of his injuries in one fell swoop.

'Truth' - Zimmerman yelled for 'help' for at least 45 seconds while Martin just looked at his watch.'Truth' - Zimmerman having already drawn his weapon before being tackled waited around for 45 seconds for the cobwebs to clear out of his head after being tackle and then calmly placed his gun (which he had somehow managed to hold on to after being tackled) in the chest of Martin while Martin just continued looking at his watch.
Undeniable Truth - Zimmerman pulled the trigger.

Which version do you think the jury is going to believe?  The one that is backed by recorded / timestamped 911 calls & evidence corroborated by eyewitness testimony?  Or the one that is full of speculation and has absolutely zero evidence and witness testimony backing it?  If you can refute anything whatsoever in the topmost story, have at it.  Keep in mind that the 911 calls are recorded and timestamped as I've already mentioned a number of times.  But if you don't find 911 calls to be reliable, then that defense strategy completely falls apart.  And admittedly, I'm putting a lot of weight on the 911 so-called 'evidence'.

-Scott

From: v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm
To: scooterd408 at hotmail.com

CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 11:53:31 -0700

In part, Scott wrote:

“Based on photographic evidence, audio evidence, the measurable timeline, GZ's medical report, TM's autopsy report combined with corroborating witness testimony, it's difficult to draw any conclusion other than TM being on top of GZ and hitting him for at least 45 seconds prior to the fatal and only shot.”

Here’s the thing, Scott:  it really isn’t difficult to draw a conclusion different than what you think.  Some people smarter than you & I agree with your interpretation, but some people smarter than you & I don’t agree with your interpretation.  For instance, I found the DNA evidence to be pretty compelling, and it absolutely did not support Zimmerman’s little one-sided tale.  You apparently think differently, or perhaps gave greater weight to other things I found less compelling.

I don’t know what “measurable timeline” you like, but the timeline I’m aware of absolutely supports that fact that an armed Zimmerman stalked Trayvon, and that Trayvon attempted to escape his stalker, unfortunately unsuccessfully, on at least one occasion.  Actually, I think it accurate to say he aggressively tracked and hunted Trayvon, but I’m content to call it stalking.

My interpretation of the evidence is that when Trayvon was unable to lose his stalker, he verbally confronted Zimmerman, who in his own statement admits that he (Zimmerman) started reaching for something.  Zimmerman “claims” he was reaching for the cell phone in his pocket, which I find to be utter rot & just another of his many lies  – he was going for his firearm.  Regardless of whether Zimmerman was reaching for his cell phone or his firearm, anyone with connected brain cells – particularly after having been stalked for several minutes and having tried unsuccessfully to escape the stalker – would reasonably assume that Zimmerman was going for a gun.  (Actually, for all you or I know, Zimmerman had already drawn down on Trayvon at that point.)  Besides, isn’t that the reaction all the gun nuts want us to have?  That’s the mindset they think will make society safer:  “Don’t mess with me because for all you know, I’m packing heat & I’ll shoot you dead.”  It would be funny if it weren’t so tragic.

Anyway, unable to outrun a bullet, Trayvon took the only option available to him, and that was to make a running tackle at the goon with the gun before he could fire.  And, Zimmerman was as lame in the confrontation he initiated as he’s been in life:  Trayvon tackles Zimmerman before Zimmerman can get off a shot.  Having watched my share of football in my younger years, I have no problem seeing how Zimmerman’s head hit the concrete & bounced, and his nose got broken, from that one tackle.  The physical evidence actually supports that scenario and the physical injuries sure don’t support Zimmerman’s tale of woe.

Further, having had the most unfortunate experience of having had to literally fight for my life, neither Zimmerman’s nor Trayvon’s injuries are consistent with your interpretation of Trayvon beating Zimmerman for “at least 45 seconds.”  They just aren’t, and that’s something that’s pretty indisputable, pure and simple.

I could go on & on & on, but I think I’ve made my point.  Reasonable and intelligent people have absolutely no difficulty drawing a conclusion different than the one you’ve chosen to draw, and to argue otherwise is really stupid and arrogant, not to mention intellectually dishonest by ignoring the wealth of evidence that contradicts your interpretation.  It’s really not difficult at all to disagree with your interpretation, and there’s just as much credible support for my interpretation as there is for yours.

Now, all of that said, I’m not saying that Zimmerman “should” have been convicted of the crimes he was charged with.  I wasn’t on the jury, and I have no reason to believe the jury didn’t perform its task to the best of its ability, something I believe I’ve gone on record as saying.  I absolutely do believe there’s something wrong with the laws in Florida when there is no criminal penalty for a pathetic pistol-packing wannabe cop who stalks & outright kills an innocent kid who was doing nothing wrong, but that’s a different matter.  I don’t think the police handled the initial investigation adequately, and I don’t think the prosecuting attorneys earned their paychecks, but those, too, are different matters.

One other point I want to make – a couple of questions, really, for those so invested in defending Zimmerman’s actions and blaming the victim.  What would your reaction have been had Zimmerman been similarly stalking a 17-year-old white girl on a dark & rainy night, a stalker she tried to lose but couldn’t?  Would you be “blaming” her -- the way you’re blaming a black boy -- for verbally confronting her stalker and trying to physically defend herself from the goblin with the gun?

Inquiring minds want to know, and we want to know you’re thinking behind your answers.

One thing I know for sure:  should Zimmerman -- or someone like him move into my neighborhood -- I’m leaving, and I’m fortunate to have the resources to do so.  He has proven himself to be nothing more than an aggressive, unbalanced, dishonest, deadly loose cannon with inexcusably bad impulse control and judgment who should never again be allowed to have a firearm.  He wasn’t criminally convicted, but I’m absolutely not going to give him a free pass for unjustly killing a kid, nor do I want any of my loved ones around such a whack job.  Ever.

Saundra
Moscow, ID

Act as if what you do makes a difference.

~ William James

From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Scott Dredge

Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 2:54 PM
To: Sunil; Paul Rumelhart; Joe Campbell
Cc: viz
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory

Based on photographic evidence, audio evidence, the measurable timeline, GZ's medical report, TM's autopsy report combined with corroborating witness testimony, it's difficult to draw any conclusion other than TM being on top of GZ and hitting him for at least 45 seconds prior to the fatal and only shot.  GZ shouldn't have followed TM and should have stayed in his truck.  TM shouldn't have attacked him.  But TM did what he did and GZ did what he did, so here we are.

This whole thing has already spun as a 'perfect storm'.  And if GZ is going to do things like tour a Kel Tec factory, pose for photo ops, and let it be known he's interested in acquiring more fire power, he's putting himself, his family, and anyone around him in danger.  His actions are tantamount to 'bring it on' taunting.  Don't be surprised if someone takes the bait resulting in more tragedy.  Don't be surprised if GZ blasts someone innocent that he mistakenly believes was coming after him.  Don't be surprised when there is another dead body and GZ claims 'self defense'.

From: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com

To: godshatter at yahoo.com; philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 13:11:03 -0700
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com

Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory
He wasn't 'going out to call the police on criminal activity.' He could have called them from his home and stayed there. Why do you even saying that? 

He was out and about because he wanted to play the cop, and he had a gun. He could have stayed home with his gun, like he was told to do. 

You keep assuming his defense theory is true. It was effective, it led to the verdict, but that doesn't make it true.

Sunil
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 11:55:13 -0700

From: godshatter at yahoo.com
To: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com

Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory
Do you think that neighborhood watch programs are a bad thing?  If you can posit for a moment that guns can come in handy for self-defense, then going out to call the police on criminal activity might be a time when you have a better chance of needing to protect yourself than when you are, say, just going to get groceries.
 If you think it wasn't self-defense, then why was Zimmerman doing his best to lead the cops to the encounter?  Why were there no injuries on Martin consistent with an initial attack by Zimmerman?  Do you think he shot him first?  Then why did witnesses see them on the ground fighting?  To me, it just doesn't add up.

Paul

From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>

To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
Cc: Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>; viz <vision2020 at moscow.com> 

Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory 
"... he thought he was going to die and defended himself." First, the only evidence you have for this is that Zimmerman said it was so. There were no witnesses to corroborate this. We don't know what happened. My interpretation of the results of the trial is that there was no reason to disbelieve Zimmerman, so no reason to find him guilty. That does not mean that we should believe him. There is no reason to believe him either. The fact is we don't know what happened in those moments prior to the shooting.

Second, Zimmerman was out looking for "criminals" like some want-a-be cop, stalked a suspected criminal who turned out to be a boy, called to report it and was advised to stop but didn't do so, got out of his car to follow the "suspect," then (supposedly) shot the boy because he feared for his life. 

I'm sorry but if you are not a cop and you leave your house with a gun pretending to "protect" your neighborhood, my sympathy level will drop dramatically should something go wrong. 
Zimmerman's actions do not sound like self-defense to me. I am not warped by the mainstream media. In fact, I think this is just another example of how fear and guns together are more likely to lead to a bad outcome than a good one. Incidents like this are precisely why we need gun control. Some people are just not smart enough to know how to use guns with the required safety and care. The Zimmerman case proves that. 
And saying that folks are dupes just because they happen to share some of the views of the mainstream media is no different from saying that you are a racist just because you happen to share some of the views of racists.
 On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

I'm not supporting Zimmerman.  I'm just dismayed by the attitudes people have towards him based on nothing but wishful thinking, as far as I can see.  These attitudes are shared across the country, and is making life for this man dangerous.  All because he thought he was going to die and defended himself. His bad luck that he did so at a time when guns are the new boogieman, and that his attacker didn't have the common sense to be a white male.

It's really how quickly and absolutely this narrative I keep talking about solidified that scares the ever-living crap out of me.  It means the main stream media is still king, and that your average American still just soaks it right up apparently uncritically.

Oh, and I don't plan to shut up, thank you anyway.

Paul

On 08/25/2013 08:39 AM, Joe Campbell wrote:
Of course I don't condone the bounty, or death threats. It is still a mystery to me why you keep condoning Zimmerman. If you want folks to stop talking about him, why don't you start us off? Really, I only post on that guy when you or others try to defend him, or act shocked about the public outrage. Otherwise, I don't really think about him much.
 On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 8:30 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

You're right.  He should look properly chastened at all times so as not to offend people like yourself.  I bet he was laughing at a joke!  The bastard.

I will admit that if he was thinking in terms of PR, then staging a photoshoot at a gun store was not the brightest move.  I suspect, though, that he can't move three feet in public without some self-righteous a-hole tracking his every move and taking his picture.  It won't last long, though.  They'll get him in civil court soon where the threshold for evidence is not so high.

While we're on the subject, does anyone out there in viz-land condone the bounty put on him by the New Black Panther Party?  Does anyone condemn it?  How about the multiple death threats he and his family have been getting?  I normally wouldn't ask this, but the reactions here to this case have so disappointed me that I just have to.

Paul 

On 08/24/2013 10:16 PM, Scott Dredge wrote:I think it's STUPID of Zimmerman to be cheesing it up for photos while touring a gun factory.  I was seeing shades that idiot president of CA fish and game who bagged a mountain lion in Idaho and went on the cover of some magazine beaming while holding the dead carcass.

FWIW - I disagree that Zimmerman was hunting Martin, but nonetheless he did fatally shoot him and this type of behavior is quite the opposite of being remorseful.  But hey, if he wants to stay around Florida and make himself visible while there's a bounty on his head, that's certainly his choice and likely another bad choice in a growing list.
CC: scooterd408 at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com

From: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Zimmy beams as he tours gun factory
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 18:30:05 -0700
To: godshatter at yahoo.com
I said it was closer to hunting than self defense. It was. And Martin was a kid; Zimmerman was not. And Martin is dead. Maybe that is why no one is blaming him. 
 Did Martin make a mistake? Apparently -- but really we don't know that any more than we know why Zimmerman did what he did. But Martin paid a hefty price for his mistake. Zimmerman did not. That's why folks are upset.

On Aug 24, 2013, at 6:20 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

That's the narrative I'm talking about.  It completely ignores Trayvon Martin's own actions that helped lead to his death and it exaggerates George Zimmerman's actions.  Following someone down a sidewalk is not the same as "hunting" a person.  We have exactly zero evidence that Zimmerman followed Martin in order to kill him.  

But have fun with the narrative.  If you happen across Zimmerman, get in a few licks for the rest of us.

Paul 

On 08/24/2013 05:44 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:
Goes against the narrative? The guy stalked a kid, against the advice of a 911 operator, and ended up killing him.  
Honestly, I just don't get it. Stalking and shooting is a lot closer to hunting than self-defense. Why is that so difficult for you to see?

On Aug 24, 2013, at 5:11 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
Well, he and his family do get death threats regularly: http://globalgrind.com/2013/08/03/robert-zimmerman-reveals-family-400-death-threats-per-minute-starbucks-employee-george-trayvon-martin-details/

And there is a $10,000 bounty put on Zimmerman for his capture by the New Black Panther Party: http://www.upi.com/blog/2013/07/19/Black-Panthers-2012-video-for-Zimmerman-bounty-resurfaces/3711374236844/

So maybe he is in need of a good home-defense weapon.

Of course, progressives are not allowed to feel bad about that because it goes against the narrative.  Pity, one could almost feel bad for a guy who is reviled on the national stage for protecting himself from getting his ass beat, whether or not it was his own stupidity that got him there.  

Oh, well.  It's much easier to think of him as a monster.  

Paul

On 08/24/2013 03:29 PM, Scott Dredge wrote:http://www.mediaite.com/online/george-zimmerman-went-gun-shopping-today/

======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com=======================================================
 =======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,

serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
              http://www.fsr.net
         mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com

======================================================= 

======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
======================================================= 		 	   		  

=======================================================

 List services made available by First Step Internet,

 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.

               http://www.fsr.net

          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com

=======================================================

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130826/21fd9530/attachment-0001.html>