[Vision2020] Witnesses: Zimmerman was beaten by Martin (Was: RE: Idaho 'Stand Your Ground' Law)
Saundra Lund
v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm
Tue Oct 1 21:16:42 PDT 2013
ROTFLOL. My guess is that Donovan doesn't accept you narritive any more
than many of us do, Scott.
Your selective quoting shows -- at best -- that you don't know nearly as
much about Jonathan Good's testimony as you think you do, and at worst,
that you are being dishonest. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt &
assume you've let your passion blind you to the vast amounts of evidence
that contradict the narrative you've constructed & try to ram down our
throats at every opportunity.
For those who aren't aware, Scott's fav witness clarified that he did
*not* see or *hear* Trayvon actually hitting Zimmerman -- that what he
saw could have been Trayvon trying to restrain Zimmerman's arms. He
absolutely did *not* see Trayvon bashing Zimmerman's head into the
concrete. Oops -- how inconveninet for Scott's interpretation.
I'll also clarify that Good's initial statements were that he couldn't
tell who was yelling for help. Oops -- yet another inconvenient fact for
Scott.
Also, Scott is wrong in stating that Zimmerman had a broken nose, more
testimony that he either missed or chooses to misrepresent. Zimmerman's
medical report -- and the PA's testimony -- stated only that his nose
was "likely" broken. Leave it to Scott, though, to inflate the
possibilities to FACT status to bolster his narrative.
And, I'll also add that Scott's fav witness's testimony that the person
on top was using MMA moves is more consistent with Zimmerman being on
top, which correlates with the testimony of another witness. Oops --
poor Scott . . . his narrative keeps falling apart, doesn't it?
And, as someone already pointed out, there's as much evidence -- far
more credible, IMHO -- that it was Trayvon yelling for help as there is
that it was Zimmerman.
I could continue for quite some time poking holes in the narrative Scott
is trying to pedal as fact here, but it gets tiresome to point out the
errors that Scott insists on repeating, so I'll stop with the fact that
the DNA evidence doesn't support Scott's narrative.
I will, however, reiterate the fact Scott wants to ignore: the jury's
finding of not guilty simply means that the jury didn't find that the
state met its burden of proof, *not* that the jury agrees -- at all --
with the narrative Scott is so heavily invested in hawking here. Of
course, Scott doesn't handle being disagreed with about his narrative,
so he will no doubt revert to type and accuse me of "just making things
up" for pointing out the problems with his little narrative.
Which would actually be pretty funny if it weren't so sad.
Saundra
On Tue, Oct 1, 2013, at 08:07 PM, Scott Dredge wrote:
> Donovan J. Arnold asked:
> "He'd been jumped, was laid out flat with has back on the ground, and
> being struck repeatedly by Trayvon Martin." And you know this to be fact,
> how?>
>
> Any doubts now Donovan? Or do you want to disregard multiple prosecution
> witness testimony and physical evidence that was undisputed at trial and
> just make up your own version of events like other creative members of
> the viz who refuse to consider the facts of the case and instead just
> want to argue on emotion, outrage, and prejudice?
>
> -Scotty
>
> > On Oct 1, 2013, at 7:15 PM, "Scott Dredge" <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I changed the subject heading Tom, which releases you from your 'nuff said on the previous thread and allows to further comment on this one if you so wish. I'm not having trouble with the links so I'll list it here again and then further snip out the specific items reported by ABC News from the trial including 2 witnesses called by the prosecution to testify that Zimmerman was beaten by Martin and also a police officer who testified that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had bits of grass on it and the back of his pants appeared to be wet. If you still want to delude yourself into believing that Zimmerman was not laying on the ground being beaten then knock yourself out. However any reasonable juror would believe that Zimmerman was being beaten since there was no dispute about this between the prosecution and the defense.
> >
> > http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-beaten-prosecution-witnesses/story?id=19517236
> >
> > 'Two witnesses called by the prosecution today described George Zimmerman as being on the losing end of a fight with Trayvon Martin in the moments before Zimmerman shot the Florida teenager.'
> > Prosecution witness John Good 'testified that he saw what he believed to be Martin on top of Zimmerman'. "The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" he said.
> > "The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara.
> >
> > "Correct," responded prosecution witness John Good.
> >
> > Jonathan Manalo testified that Zimmerman looked like he had "got his butt beat," but was "speaking clearly."
> > Manalo further testified that Zimmerman told him as he approached, "This guy was beating me up. I was defending myself and I shot him."
> > Police Officer Tim Smith told the court he took Zimmerman into custody on the night of the shooting and that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had bits of grass on it, and the back of his pants appeared wet. It had been raining that night and the ground was wet.
> >
> > If you have no more to say, I can certainly understand. What more needs to be said? He was on the ground being beaten. This is not even even in dispute. He was calling for help. You can hear calls for help on the 911 call. The prosecution eyewitness testified that Zimmerman was the guy on the bottom yelling for help while being beaten by Martin.
> >
> > You can read the transcripts or watch the testimony for yourself and completely dismiss it in favor of your prejudged conclusion 'guilty'.
> >
> > -Scott
> >
> > CC: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com; vision2020 at moscow.com; sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> > From: thansen at moscow.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Idaho 'Stand Your Ground' Law
> > Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 17:24:14 -0700
> > To: scooterd408 at hotmail.com
> >
> > Mr. Dredge -
> >
> > Your soyrce goes no further than to say there was a trial and that some witnesses did, or did not, testify. Key links within your source respond with "Page Not Found".
> >
> > Tomtell you the truth, this "old hat" discussion is non-productive, especially when one considers the subject of this thread, "Idaho 'Stand Your Ground' Law"
> >
> > 'Nuff said!
> >
> > Have a nice evening
> >
> > Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
> >
> > "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> > http://www.MoscowCares.com
> >
> > Tom Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> > "There's room at the top they are telling you still
> > But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> > If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
> >
> > - John Lennon
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 1, 2013, at 5:15 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Tom - yes - I can substantiate my claims and further I can debunk yours. You post a snip about audio experts and then curiously neglect to mention that audio experts did not testify at the trial. The jurors listened to the 911 calls and they heard cries for help. The prosecution puts up a witness that testifies that Martin is top of Zimmerman beating him and that "The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" he said. The prosecution put two witnesses up on the stand that claimed Martin was beating Zimmerman. How you and Saundra and anyone else can be in denial regarding this is beyond reason. The prosecutions version of the story is that Martin was beating Zimmerman and here is the link:
> > http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-beaten-prosecution-witnesses/story?id=19517236
> >
> > You then further claim 'The minor abrasion on the back of Zimmerman's head which did not require any immediate attention' and from the same link above 'Stacy Livingston, an EMT who arrived on the scene, said she treated Zimmerman -- who was complaining of dizziness -- for five minutes before releasing him into police custody.' And the purpose of your claim is what? That Zimmerman wasn't beaten badly enough and that he should have had worse injuries to justify any beating? The judge should have instructed the jury to ignore photographic of injuries to Zimmerman, ignore the testimony of the EMT who treated him at the scene, ignore the medical report taken the morning after the shooting, ignore eyewitness testimony that he was being beaten and yelling 'Help'?
> >
> > You make a claim that 'Zimmerman was not anywhere for medical aid for FOUR DAYS following the incident.' Really? An EMT testifying that she treated Zimmerman at the scene doesn't count. And Zimmerman's doctor who examined him the morning after the shooting doesn't count either?
> >
> > Given all of the available 911 evidence and witness testimony, how do you come anywhere close to meeting burden of proof for 2nd degree murder or manslaughter against self-defense? It can't be done. This is why the police didn't arrest him to begin with. It wasn't because they were racist as much as you racists who are continuously playing the race card want to believe the worst in everyone. They didn't arrest him because they couldn't find any law that he broke. Likewise the jury acquitted because they too couldn't find any law that he broke.
> >
> > -Scott
> >
> >
> > CC: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com; vision2020 at moscow.com; sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> > From: thansen at moscow.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Idaho 'Stand Your Ground' Law
> > Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 16:28:35 -0700
> > To: scooterd408 at hotmail.com
> >
> > Courtesy of CNN at:
> >
> > http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/23/justice/florida-zimmerman-timeline/index.html
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> >
> > April 2: Audio experts tell CNN that they don't believe it's Zimmerman who can be heard yelling "Help!" in the background of a 911 call. They compare those screams with Zimmerman's voice, as recorded in a 911 call he made minutes earlier describing a "suspicious" black male, who ended up being Martin.
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> >
> > I will continue to research my claims and provide sources of my research here on the Viz. However, records have become mire difficult to locate over time.
> >
> > Mr. Dredge: Have yoy identified any resources to substantiate your claims? If so, it would certainly help. Thanks.
> >
> > Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
> >
> > "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> > http://www.MoscowCares.com
> >
> > Tom Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> > "There's room at the top they are telling you still
> > But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> > If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
> >
> > - John Lennon
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 1, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Tom - the worst source of information - writes:
> > <Zimmerman was not anywhere for medical aid for FOUR DAYS following the incident.>
> > Horseshit - the medical report was written up the morning after the shooting
> >
> > <The minor abrasion on the back of Zimmerman's head which did not require any immediate attention.>
> > Not 'abrasion'. Two lacerations or two 'cuts' if you want to further minimize the injuries which you already think are self inflicted anyway within two minute of police arriving on the scene and handcuffing Zimmerman. It would only make sense to the jurors that the cuts were inflicted due to actions from Trayvon Martin either rabbit punching him or knocking his head on the pavement.
> >
> > <The cries for help which NOBODY had proven from whom (Zimmerman or Martin) they originated.>
> > The 911 call recorded the screams for help. The only eye witness testified he heard cries for help and further testified that he thought they were coming from Zimmerman. Once again this was a prosecution witness that is testifying. It's rather ludicrous to think that jurors are going pull a story out of their collective asses based on nothing put forth by the prosecution that Martin was the one screaming for help.
> >
> > -Scott
> >
> >
> > CC: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com; vision2020 at moscow.com; sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> > From: moscowcares at moscow.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Idaho 'Stand Your Ground' Law
> > Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 14:41:49 -0700
> > To: scooterd408 at hotmail.com
> >
> > Do you have a source to substantiate these claims, Mr. Dredge.
> >
> > My recollection of the evidence/testimony differs considerably, especially considering . . .
> >
> > - The cries for help which NOBODY had proven from whom (Zimmerman or Martin) they originated.
> >
> > - The minor abrasion on the back of Zimmerman's head which did not require any immediate attention.
> >
> > - Zimmerman was not anywhere for medical aid for FOUR DAYS following the incident.
> >
> > I will get back with the Viz after I research this once I return from the post office and the Palouse Humane Society.
> >
> > Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
> >
> > "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> > http://www.MoscowCares.com
> >
> > Tom Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> > "There's room at the top they are telling you still
> > But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> > If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
> >
> > - John Lennon
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 1, 2013, at 2:29 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Recorded / timestamped 911 calls with Zimmerman screaming for help for 45 seconds prior the recorded sound of the gunshot.
> > Pictures taken at the scene by police who arrived within 2 minutes of the shooting showing Zimmerman with a bloody and swollen nose.
> > Pictures taken at the police station showing Zimmerman with the back of his head cut and bleeding.
> > Zimmerman's medical report written up the morning after the shooting documenting multiple injuries including a broken nose
> > Witness for the PROSECUTION PROSECUTION PROSECUTION (I can't emphasize this enough) testifying that Zimmerman was on the ground and that Trayvon Martin was on top of him beating him.
> >
> >
> > If you have any other evidence or witness testimony to refute any of the above, please present it. And to reiterate, Zimmerman's defense did not invoke 'Stand your ground' because it wasn't necessary.
> >
> >
> > -Scott
> >
> >
> > Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 12:00:38 -0700
> > From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Idaho 'Stand Your Ground' Law
> > To: scooterd408 at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com; sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> >
> > "He'd been jumped, was laid out flat with has back on the ground, and being struck repeatedly by Trayvon Martin." And you know this to be fact, how?
> >
> > Donovan J. Arnold
> > From: Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>
> > To: viz <vision2020 at moscow.com>; Sunil <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 10:24 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Idaho 'Stand Your Ground' Law
> >
> > No takers on Idaho 'stand your ground' jury instructions that I posed below? I'm disappointed. It's mighty white of most of you to have concern for Florida's laws and not Idaho's laws on 'stand your ground'. And note that Zimmerman's defense invoked 'self defense' and not 'stand your ground' probably because Zimmerman wasn't standing. He'd been jumped, was laid out flat with has back on the ground, and being struck repeatedly by Trayvon Martin.
> >
> > Tom Hansen wrote:
> > <It's Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law that I furiously believe should be repealed before the next "Trayvon Martin".>
> > http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2013-August/092859.html
> >
> > -Scott
> >
> > From: scooterd408 at hotmail.com
> > To: vision2020 at moscow.com; sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> > Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2013 12:43:09 -0600
> > Subject: [Vision2020] Idaho 'Stand Your Ground' Law
> >
> > Tom wrote on Fri Jul 19 13:11:26 2013:
> > <The way I interpret the Idaho [stand your ground] law is similar to Texas' law, that the perpetrator must be either on your property or attempting to enter your property.>
> >
> > This took me a while to get back to and I talked to one of my UI dorm mates who was an Idaho prosecutor for many years. Maybe Sunil who is also a former prosecutor can confirm, but this is what I've been informed are the current Idaho jury instructions regarding 'stand your ground':
> >
> > The jury instruction currently approved by the Idaho Supreme Court, based on Idaho's common law, is this: "In the exercise of the right of [self defense] [defense of another], one need not retreat. One may stand one's ground and defend [oneself] [the other person] by the use of all force and means which would appear to be necessary to a reasonable person in a similar situation and with similar knowledge[; and a person may pursue the attacker until [the person] [the other person] has been secured from danger if that course likewise appears reasonably necessary]. This law applies even though the person being [attacked] [defended] might more easily have gained safety by flight or by withdrawing from the scene."
> >
> > -Scott
> >
> > From thansen at moscow.com Fri Jul 19 13:11:26 2013
> > Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:11:26 -0700
> > Subject: [Vision2020] Vision2020 Digest, Vol 85, Issue 95
> >
> > The way I interpret the Idaho law is similar to Texas' law, that the perpetrator must be either on your property or attempting to enter your property.
> >
> > Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
> >
> > "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> > http://www.MoscowCares.com
> >
> > Tom Hansen
> > Moscow, Idaho
> >
> > "There's room at the top they are telling you still
> > But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> > If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
> >
> > - John Lennon
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jul 19, 2013, at 1:00 PM, Dan Carscallen <areaman530 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Tom et al,
> > >
> > > While Idaho's law isn't necessarily "stand your ground", I don't think you have to be on your own property, but I believe you *do* have to prove that you were in imminent danger of losing your life.
> > >
> > > DC
> > >
> > > On Jul 19, 2013, at 11:56, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Exactly, Joe.
> > >>
> > >> The state of Florida has become the venue where the shoot-out at the OK Corral would be considered legal, provided that each side is in fear for their lives when they initially meet. There is no requirement for anybody to seek alternate actions to "ready-aim(optional)-fire".
> > >>
> > >> At least Idaho requires the threat to take place on your property when younpull the trigger.
> > >>
> > >> Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .
> > >>
> > >> "Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)
> > >> http://www.MoscowCares.com
> > >>
> > >> Tom Hansen
> > >> Moscow, Idaho
> > >>
> > >> "There's room at the top they are telling you still
> > >> But first you must learn how to smile as you kill
> > >> If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
> > >>
> > >> - John Lennon
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Jul 19, 2013, at 11:44 AM, Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Gary,
> > >>>
> > >>> I don't want to pick on Zimmerman. Other than some superficial understanding of the case, I know nothing about Mr. Zimmerman, no reason to think he's racist or whatever. I also think that, were I a juror, I might have found him innocent since -- as you note below -- there were no eyewitnesses and thus reasonable doubt about his guilt. Again, I have only a superficial understanding of the case.
> > >>>
> > >>> But the real story seems different than the one you tell below and based on my understanding of the story I would say it sounds as if Mr. Zimmerman is guilty of negligence leading to the death of a young man, at the very least. Again, given the stand-your-ground law it is unlikely he can be charged with anything.
> > >>>
> > >>> But that is what is so disturbing to me about the case. Likely Zimmerman violated no laws. Maybe Zimmerman is not a racist but of course there are a lot of racists. Maybe he didn't think Martin was suspicious because he was black but if you listen to the black men talking to Chris Matthews about their experiences in the link I posted yesterday stories of black men being suspected of wrongdoing merely because they are black are all too common.
> > >>>
> > >>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/19/chris-matthews-apologizes-black-colleagues-behalf-white-people_n_3622703.html
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> So here is the situation we have now, given the Zimmerman result. A white man in Florida, armed with a gun, can get into a car and follow any black kid he wants. If the black kid objects in a threatening way he can shoot and kill him. Your tendency to disagree with anything that progressives and liberals say must be pretty strong for you to look at this story and not think that something is seriously wrong. Zimmerman is guilty of something, maybe not in the eyes of crazy Florida law but at least in some common sense moral way.
> >
> > ======================================================= 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
> =======================================================
> =======================================================
> 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
> =======================================================
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list